Feb. 4, 2026 – As of Jan. 29, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court has heard 34 cases, with 4 oral arguments scheduled for February and 18 cases not yet set for argument.
Major Decisions in January
On appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for Seventh Circuit, the Supreme Court reversed (7-2) the lower court, holding an Illinois Congressman has standing to challenge an Illinois law that allows mail-in ballots to be counted after Election Day.
The authors. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh, JJ., joined. Barrett, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Kagan, J., joined. Jackson, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Sotomayor, J., joined.
On appeal from the Montana Supreme Court, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the conviction of a man, William Case, convicted of assaulting a police officer. The Court held that police did not violate Case’s Fourth Amendment right when they entered his home without a warrant because officers reasonably believed Case needed emergency assistance – his ex-girlfriend told police Case threatened suicide.
The authors. Kagan, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Sotomayor, J., and Gorsuch, J., filed concurring opinions.
On appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause prohibited the defendant from receiving a separate firearm conviction for a single act that violated two provisions within 18 U.S.C. section 924. The defendant had committed robberies with a firearm, one causing a death.
Jay D. Jerde, Mitchell Hamline 2006, is a legal writer for the State Bar of Wisconsin, Madison. He can be reached by
email or by phone at (608) 250-6126.
The authors. Jackson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court with respect to Parts I, II, III, IV – A, and IV – B, and an opinion with respect to Part IV – C, in which Roberts, C. J., and Sotomayor and Kagan, JJ., joined. Gorsuch, J., filed an opinion concurring in part.
On appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, the Supreme Court (5-4) ruled that a federal law relating to the finality of determinations does not bar the Supreme Court from reviewing a
federal prisoners’ requests to file a second or successive motion for postconviction relief to challenge convictions or sentences. In addition, the statute for second or successive motions for state habeas petitions does not apply to second or successive motions filed under the federal habeas statute to federal prisoners challenging their convictions or sentences.
The authors. Sotomayor, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Kagan, Kavanaugh and Jackson, JJ., joined. Jackson, J., filed a concurring opinion. Gorsuch, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Thomas and Alito, JJ., joined, and in which Barrett, J., joined as to Part I.
Featured January Oral Argument
West Virginia v. B.P.J. (argued Jan. 13, 2026)
Little v. Hecox (argued Jan. 13, 2026)
Issue: Whether West Virginia and Idaho laws that prohibit transgender women and girls from competing on women’s and girls' school sports teams violate Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause.
That’s what Howe said: “The Supreme Court on Tuesday seemed unlikely to uphold the laws. … The court’s three Democratic appointees appeared to recognize that the challengers faced an uphill battle.” – Amy Howe, SCOTUSblog
Executive Action Cases Pending
Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump: Whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) enables the president to unilaterally impose, revoke, pause, reinstate, and adjust tariffs.
Trump v. Slaughter: Under federal law, Federal Trade Commission commissioners can only be removed for “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” The issue is whether these “for-cause” protections violate the separation of powers,
i.e., the president’s power to terminate members of the Executive Branch. The case involves the attempted firing of FTC commissioner Rebecca Slaughter.
Trump v. Cook: The Court is asked to block a federal court ruling that allowed Lisa Cook, a member of the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, to stay in office despite President Trump’s attempt to fire her. U.S. District Judge Jia Cobb initially ruled that Cook was “substantially likely” to succeed on the merits because of “for-cause” protections that apply only to conduct occurring in office. The U.S. Supreme Court deferred an application for stay pending oral argument on Jan. 21, 2026.
Trump v. Barbara: Whether a presidential executive order that would end the guarantee of citizenship for all persons born in the U.S. violates a provision of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment, which says “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”
