Supreme Court holds that the race-based admissions programs of two colleges violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.Ībitron Austria GmbH v. Supreme Court holds that student loan borrowers lack standing to challenge the lawfulness of a loan forgiveness plan enacted by the Secretary of Education under the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003.

Supreme Court invalidates the Secretary of Education's 2022 program to reduce or eliminate federal student loan debt for most borrowers. Lawyers for the groups cited an 1871 Supreme Court precedent that held that Congress can specify rules about how federal court cases should be heard and resolved, but it cannot dictate how federal courts should rule, as that would be an unconstitutional intrusion the separate powers of the judiciary and would allow Congress 'to pick winners and losers' in litigation that before the federal courts.Supreme Court holds that the First Amendment prohibits Colorado from forcing a website designer to create expressive designs for same-sex marriages, speaking messages with which the designer disagrees. The decision was a blow to the Wilderness Society and other environmental groups that had urged the court to uphold the temporary halt in pipeline completion. The federal government weighed in as well, supporting the pipeline's legal position.Īnd on Thursday, the Supreme Court, in an unsigned order, agreed, all but ensuring that the pipeline's completion will go forward. The Supreme Court has in two cases over the last decade weakened the Voting Rights Act, beginning in 2013 when it gutted a key provision of the law that allowed for federal oversight of election. They argued that under the new law, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals no longer has the power to hear the case. federal courts exclusive power to rule on any constitutional challenge.Ĭiting that law, lawyers for the pipeline asked the Supreme Court to vacate the lower court order and direct dismissal of the litigation. As for any challenge to the constitutionality of the provision, the bill gave the D.C.

In explicit terms, Congress not only approved the Mountain Valley Pipeline, but 'Section 234' of the debt ceiling bill also took away the ability of federal courts to hear any remaining challenges to it. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., insisted on in exchange for his support. Tucked into last month's deal to raise the debt ceiling and avoid default was a provision Sen. This time, however, pipeline advocates had a new federal law on their side - and in an unusual place. In the current round of litigation, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an order that temporarily blocked completion of the pipeline while the court reviewed Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management authorizations for the pipeline's completion. The pipeline is controversial, and over the past six years, various lower federal court decisions have interrupted and delayed its construction.

The case involved an emergency challenge to the final stages of development of the 303-mile pipeline, which is to span from northwestern West Virginia to southern Virginia. In doing so, the court affirmed certain powers that Congress has over federal courts, and all but ensured quick completion of the natural gas pipeline. Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline could resume immediately.

U s supreme court decisions today