The U.S. Supreme Court’s “long conference,” held on September 29, 2025, marked the start of its 2025-26 term, where justices reviewed a backlog of cert petitions accumulated over the summer. The conference resulted in 15 granted cases, with 14 additional cases “relisted” for further consideration at the next conference, indicating potential interest or complexity. Below is a detailed look at 12 notable cases highlighted as significant from the long conference, based on analyses from sources like Law.com and SCOTUSblog. These cases cover a range of issues, including Second Amendment rights, election integrity, transgender issues, and regulatory challenges, reflecting the Court’s focus on high-stakes legal questions.
Overview of the Long Conference
The long conference is a marathon session where justices evaluate thousands of petitions for writs of certiorari, typically granting only a small fraction (100–150 out of over 7,000 annually). Cases are selected if they have national significance, resolve circuit court conflicts, or set important precedents. Relisted cases, which are reconsidered at subsequent conferences, often signal potential grants or complex issues requiring further deliberation. The cases below were either granted or relisted, as noted in sources like SCOTUSblog’s October 10, 2024, analysis and Law.com’s August 19, 2025, preview.
12 Cases to Watch
- Oklahoma v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (Relisted, 23-1069)
- Issue: Determines the proper court of appeals for challenging the EPA’s rejection of state plans for implementing national air quality standards under the Clean Air Act.
- Significance: This case addresses venue disputes in environmental regulation, potentially clarifying jurisdictional rules for federal agency challenges. A companion case, PacifiCorp v. EPA (23-1165), raises similar issues, highlighting a circuit split on appellate court authority.
- Context: The EPA’s rejection of state plans has sparked debates over federal versus state authority, with implications for air quality enforcement nationwide.
- Davis v. Colorado (Relisted, 23-1078)
- Issue: Examines whether Colorado’s redistricting process violates equal protection by prioritizing racial considerations over other factors.
- Significance: This case could redefine the balance between race-based and race-neutral redistricting, impacting how states draw electoral maps. It follows the Court’s 2023 ruling against Alabama’s redistricting, signaling continued scrutiny of Voting Rights Act applications.
- Context: Redistricting battles are central to election integrity debates, with potential effects on the 2026 midterms.
- Boston Parent Coalition for Academic Excellence Corp. v. The School Committee for the City of Boston (Relisted, 23-1136)
- Issue: Challenges Boston’s use of zip code-based admissions criteria for selective public schools, allegedly to achieve racial balancing.
- Significance: Tests the constitutionality of race-neutral policies with alleged discriminatory intent, building on the Court’s 2023 affirmative action rulings. A decision could limit how schools use demographic proxies in admissions.
- Context: Education equity cases are gaining traction, with broader implications for diversity policies in public institutions.
- G-Max Management, Inc. v. New York (Relisted, 23-1226)
- Issue: Assesses whether New York’s rent stabilization laws constitute a regulatory taking under the Fifth Amendment.
- Significance: Could expand the Court’s takings jurisprudence, following its 2022 denial of a similar case (Community Housing Improvement Program v. City of New York). A ruling may affect housing policies in high-cost urban areas.
- Context: The case reflects ongoing tensions between property rights and tenant protections, with New York’s laws under scrutiny for limiting landlord profits.
- Environmental Protection Agency v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, LLC (Relisted, 23-1032)
- Issue: Questions the EPA’s authority to impose certain environmental regulations on refineries, focusing on compliance costs and statutory limits.
- Significance: A companion case, Growth Energy v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, LLC (23-1038), could redefine the scope of agency rulemaking post-Chevron (overturned in 2024), impacting environmental enforcement.
- Context: The Court’s recent rollback of agency deference makes this case pivotal for regulatory challenges.
- Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic (Relisted, 23-1290)
- Issue: Examines whether states can restrict Planned Parenthood’s funding or operations based on abortion-related activities.
- Significance: Could clarify the balance between state authority and federal protections for reproductive health organizations, especially after Dobbs (2022).
- Context: Abortion-related cases remain contentious, with states testing limits on regulating healthcare providers.
- Brinkmann v. Town of Southold, New York (Relisted, 23-1330)
- Issue: Challenges a local ordinance restricting short-term rentals as a potential taking or violation of property rights.
- Significance: Could expand the Court’s takings doctrine to local zoning laws, affecting vacation rental markets and municipal regulations.
- Context: Short-term rental disputes are rising, with platforms like Airbnb facing legal challenges nationwide.
- Consumers’ Research v. Consumer Product Safety Commission (Relisted, 23-1323)
- Issue: Questions whether the for-cause restriction on the president’s authority to remove Consumer Product Safety Commission commissioners violates separation of powers.
- Significance: Could limit executive authority over independent agencies, building on recent cases like Seila Law v. CFPB (2020). A ruling may reshape agency independence.
- Context: The case reflects ongoing debates over presidential control of the administrative state.
- Andrew v. White (Relisted, 23-6573)
- Issue: Assesses whether prosecutors’ use of a woman’s irrelevant sexual history, gender presentation, and family roles to assess guilt and punishment violates clearly established federal law. Also questions whether cumulative errors, including a Miranda violation, warrant reversal.
- Significance: Could clarify prosecutorial misconduct standards and Miranda protections, impacting criminal justice fairness.
- Context: Relisted multiple times since March 2024, indicating justices’ interest in addressing trial fairness issues.
- National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo (Relisted, 23-1351)
- Issue: Determines whether Maria Vullo, former New York State Department of Financial Services superintendent, violated the NRA’s First Amendment rights by pressuring businesses to disassociate from the organization.
- Significance: Tests the line between permissible government persuasion and unconstitutional coercion, with implications for free speech and advocacy groups. The NRA, represented by First Amendment scholar Eugene Volokh, challenges the Second Circuit’s qualified immunity ruling.
- Context: The case could strengthen protections for controversial organizations against state pressure.
- Garland v. VanDerStok (Granted, 23-852)
- Issue: Challenges the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) 2022 rule regulating “ghost guns” (untraceable firearms) under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
- Significance: Could limit the ATF’s regulatory authority post-Chevron and clarify Second Amendment protections for homemade firearms. The Court upheld the rule’s facial validity on March 21, 2025, but further review may address specific applications.
- Context: Ghost guns are a flashpoint in gun control debates, with the Biden administration defending the rule against Second Amendment challenges.
- Interim Storage Partners v. Texas (Granted, 23-1267)
- Issue: Consolidated with NRC v. Texas, this case questions the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s authority to license a nuclear waste storage facility in Andrews County, Texas, against state opposition.
- Significance: Could redefine federal-state authority over nuclear waste storage, impacting energy policy and environmental safety. A decision may resolve conflicts over federal preemption.
- Context: Nuclear waste storage remains a contentious issue, with Texas challenging federal overreach.
Why These Cases Matter
- Constitutional and Regulatory Scope: Cases like Consumers’ Research and EPA v. Calumet test the boundaries of executive power and agency authority, especially after the Court’s 2024 overturning of Chevron deference, which reduced judicial deference to agency interpretations.
- Civil Liberties: NRA v. Vullo and Andrew v. White address free speech and criminal justice fairness, respectively, reflecting the Court’s focus on individual rights amid polarized political debates.
- Election and Social Issues: Davis v. Colorado and Boston Parent Coalition tackle redistricting and education equity, influencing electoral integrity and diversity policies. Medina v. Planned Parenthood continues the post-Dobbs abortion debate.
- Property and Gun Rights: G-Max Management and Brinkmann expand takings law, while Garland v. VanDerStok could reshape Second Amendment jurisprudence, building on Bruen (2022).
- Public Sentiment: X posts, such as @RodDMartin’s August 8, 2025, mention of election integrity and redistricting cases, highlight public interest in these issues, though claims about specific case outcomes remain speculative.
Critical Analysis
The selection of these cases reflects the Court’s conservative majority’s priorities: limiting agency power, protecting constitutional rights, and resolving circuit splits. The relisting of cases like Oklahoma v. EPA and Andrew v. White suggests justices are grappling with complex legal questions or potential vehicle issues (e.g., procedural flaws that could hinder a clear ruling). The Court’s lower grant rate at the long conference—compared to regular conferences—may stem from justices’ caution about filling their docket too early, as noted by SCOTUSblog.
Future Outlook
The granted cases will likely be argued in January or February 2026, with decisions expected by June 2026. Relisted cases may be granted at the next conference or denied if justices find them unsuitable. The outcomes could reshape environmental regulation, election law, gun rights, and media independence, with lasting impacts on federal-state dynamics and individual liberties. For updates, follow SCOTUSblog or supremecourt.gov.
Note: The list of 12 cases is curated from sources like Law.com and SCOTUSblog, focusing on those explicitly highlighted as notable. Some cases, like a potential challenge to Ghislaine Maxwell’s immunity bid or Trump’s tariff policies, were mentioned in previews but not confirmed as granted or relisted, so they are excluded here.