Predict what the most significant SCOTUS decisions of the next 10 years (2024-2034) will be about

[Blue3]

Predict what the most significant SCOTUS decisions of the next 10 years (2024-2034) will be about

[NewYorkExpress]

Assuming the Court gets cases that can overturn Obergefell and Griswold, probably those.

Otherwise, possibly a case testing something like whether conviction in an impeachment trial two thirds means all one hundred Senators or just two thirds of who is present. (McConnell, or more likely a Republican Majority leader who isn't McConnell very much will abuse the definition of two thirds to lock the opposition out and perform a soft coup), or possibly a case directly challenging Miranda or Gideon (though I suspect the Supreme Court would uphold both decisions at this point).

[brucejoel99]

The post-WHPA case in which the Court holds that provision of abortion services substantially affects interstate commerce.

[Frodo]

The Court will rule that the Equal Rights Amendment (as passed by Congress in 1972) cannot be added to the Constitution since by the time the last congressionally-imposed deadline was reached in 1982, not enough states had ratified it.  So subsequent ratifications by states shall be deemed invalid as being in breach of the last deadline.  As a sop to ERA advocates, the justices will also rule that states cannot revoke their prior ratification of the amendment. 

So ERA advocates will essentially be back to square one.  Which should provide an opportunity to rewrite the Equal Rights Amendment to make it more inclusive, and to ensure that in the future there shall be no congressionally-imposed deadlines to hamper passage of its successor.  

Perhaps a new Equal Rights Amendment would look something like this:

"ARTICLE —

"Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, disability, ancestry or national origin.

"Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

"Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification."

[Ferguson97]

Overturning Obergefell and declaring all gun control unconstitutional.

[Horus]

Overturning Obergefell and declaring all gun control unconstitutional.

Not happening.

[Vosem]

Reviving the non-delegation doctrine.

Overturning Obergefell and declaring all gun control unconstitutional.

Overturning Obergefell might happen someday, but it wouldn't matter in a world where RMA is federal law anyway. Gun control is already very impractical in the Defense Distributed world; declaring all of it unconstitutional wouldn't really change the situation as much as it might've 20 years ago.

[Orser67]

Given how close recent elections have been, another "Bush v. Gore" certainly seems plausible. I will say that the restraint shown by the Roberts bloc hopefully makes that a little less likely than if Alito/Thomas were running the show. The certification of elections (e.g. the role Pence played in 2020, and the various attempts to deny the election results at the state level) also comes to mind as something that could make its way to the Supreme Court.

Not sure about individual positions on this one, but in terms of things that would really gain national attention, I could see the Court fully doing away with Miranda rights. There have been a couple recent-ish cases that chipped away at it.

[NewYorkExpress]

Given how close recent elections have been, another "Bush v. Gore" certainly seems plausible. I will say that the restraint shown by the Roberts bloc hopefully makes that a little less likely than if Alito/Thomas were running the show. The certification of elections (e.g. the role Pence played in 2020, and the various attempts to deny the election results at the state level) also comes to mind as something that could make its way to the Supreme Court.

Not sure about individual positions on this one, but in terms of things that would really gain national attention, I could see the Court fully doing away with Miranda rights. There have been a couple recent-ish cases that chipped away at it.

You're assuming any state will actively try to challenge Miranda any time soon. I actually think Gideon is more vulnerable, given society's distaste of lawyers in general, and especially criminal defense attorneys.

[Skill and Chance]

A revolution in Indian Law in favor of the tribes- with KBJ replacing Breyer, there are currently 4 solid votes for this on SCOTUS and the 5th vote for this could come from either the left or the originalist right (interpreting treaties as the tribes would have understood them when they were signed, as Gorsuch does).

For conventional left/right issues, Kavanaugh has become virtually indistinguishable from Roberts.  Also, in the few cases where they disagree meaningfully (e.g. Dobbs), Roberts is loathe to overturn precedent, even when he originally dissented.  The likelihood of getting 5 justices solidly to the left or right of both of them is low for the foreseeable future. 

Furthermore, it may be difficult for a Republican president to find and confirm a replacement for Alito or Thomas who is equally right wing.  The likelihood of ending up with another Gorsuch style justice from a future R appointment is reasonably high, and that's where precedent could really shift: on issues where the liberal justices take the libertarian view.

[heatcharger]

A revolution in Indian Law in favor of the tribes- with KBJ replacing Breyer, there are currently 4 solid votes for this on SCOTUS and the 5th vote for this could come from either the left or the originalist right (interpreting treaties as the tribes would have understood them when they were signed, as Gorsuch does).

For conventional left/right issues, Kavanaugh has become virtually indistinguishable from Roberts.  Also, in the few cases where they disagree meaningfully (e.g. Dobbs), Roberts is loathe to overturn precedent, even when he originally dissented.  The likelihood of getting 5 justices solidly to the left or right of both of them is low for the foreseeable future. 

Furthermore, it may be difficult for a Republican president to find and confirm a replacement for Alito or Thomas who is equally right wing.  The likelihood of ending up with another Gorsuch style justice from a future R appointment is reasonably high, and that's where precedent could really shift: on issues where the liberal justices take the libertarian view.

Another Skill and Chance banger 🔥

[Adam_Trask]

Ridiculous predictions follow:

#1: Death of Chevron Deference. Conservatives on the court seemed geared up for this one, and they've taken cert on a chevron question for next term.

#2: Criminalizing possession of a firearm by a felon = unconstitutional under Bruen. See very recent 3rd Cir. en banc decision.

#3: Death of New York Times v. Sullivan. No matter where you are on the political spectrum, everybody wants file more defamation lawsuits against news outlets!

[Stranger in a strange land]

A revolution in Indian Law in favor of the tribes- with KBJ replacing Breyer, there are currently 4 solid votes for this on SCOTUS and the 5th vote for this could come from either the left or the originalist right (interpreting treaties as the tribes would have understood them when they were signed, as Gorsuch does).

For conventional left/right issues, Kavanaugh has become virtually indistinguishable from Roberts.  Also, in the few cases where they disagree meaningfully (e.g. Dobbs), Roberts is loathe to overturn precedent, even when he originally dissented.  The likelihood of getting 5 justices solidly to the left or right of both of them is low for the foreseeable future. 

Furthermore, it may be difficult for a Republican president to find and confirm a replacement for Alito or Thomas who is equally right wing.  The likelihood of ending up with another Gorsuch style justice from a future R appointment is reasonably high, and that's where precedent could really shift: on issues where the liberal justices take the libertarian view.

The fact that SCOTUS nominations are so much more partisan now actually makes it more difficult for ideologues to be confirmed: Clarence Thomas was confirmed by a Senate with 56 Democrats*, while Trump was constrained by having to nominate judges who Susan Collins or Lisa Murkowski would vote for.

*Yes, most of the Democrats who voted for Thomas were conservative Dixiecrats, but all of them were also more liberal than the Republicans who eventually replaced them.

[Skill and Chance]

A revolution in Indian Law in favor of the tribes- with KBJ replacing Breyer, there are currently 4 solid votes for this on SCOTUS and the 5th vote for this could come from either the left or the originalist right (interpreting treaties as the tribes would have understood them when they were signed, as Gorsuch does).

For conventional left/right issues, Kavanaugh has become virtually indistinguishable from Roberts.  Also, in the few cases where they disagree meaningfully (e.g. Dobbs), Roberts is loathe to overturn precedent, even when he originally dissented.  The likelihood of getting 5 justices solidly to the left or right of both of them is low for the foreseeable future. 

Furthermore, it may be difficult for a Republican president to find and confirm a replacement for Alito or Thomas who is equally right wing.  The likelihood of ending up with another Gorsuch style justice from a future R appointment is reasonably high, and that's where precedent could really shift: on issues where the liberal justices take the libertarian view.

The fact that SCOTUS nominations are so much more partisan now actually makes it more difficult for ideologues to be confirmed: Clarence Thomas was confirmed by a Senate with 56 Democrats*, while Trump was constrained by having to nominate judges who Susan Collins or Lisa Murkowski would vote for.

*Yes, most of the Democrats who voted for Thomas were conservative Dixiecrats, but all of them were also more liberal than the Republicans who eventually replaced them.

This is actually a good point.  It's likely that there will be a lot more Kavanaughs and Kagans in the future than Sotomayors or Alitos.  Will be very difficult to rock the boat unless you just had a landslide in the senate. 

[David Hume]

A revolution in Indian Law in favor of the tribes- with KBJ replacing Breyer, there are currently 4 solid votes for this on SCOTUS and the 5th vote for this could come from either the left or the originalist right (interpreting treaties as the tribes would have understood them when they were signed, as Gorsuch does).

For conventional left/right issues, Kavanaugh has become virtually indistinguishable from Roberts.  Also, in the few cases where they disagree meaningfully (e.g. Dobbs), Roberts is loathe to overturn precedent, even when he originally dissented.  The likelihood of getting 5 justices solidly to the left or right of both of them is low for the foreseeable future. 

Furthermore, it may be difficult for a Republican president to find and confirm a replacement for Alito or Thomas who is equally right wing.  The likelihood of ending up with another Gorsuch style justice from a future R appointment is reasonably high, and that's where precedent could really shift: on issues where the liberal justices take the libertarian view.

The fact that SCOTUS nominations are so much more partisan now actually makes it more difficult for ideologues to be confirmed: Clarence Thomas was confirmed by a Senate with 56 Democrats*, while Trump was constrained by having to nominate judges who Susan Collins or Lisa Murkowski would vote for.

*Yes, most of the Democrats who voted for Thomas were conservative Dixiecrats, but all of them were also more liberal than the Republicans who eventually replaced them.

Both Collins and Murkowski voted for Alito.

Being conservative is not the issue. The issue is being controversial, like making some stupid comments or having scandals like Kavanaugh.

[Skill and Chance]

A revolution in Indian Law in favor of the tribes- with KBJ replacing Breyer, there are currently 4 solid votes for this on SCOTUS and the 5th vote for this could come from either the left or the originalist right (interpreting treaties as the tribes would have understood them when they were signed, as Gorsuch does).

For conventional left/right issues, Kavanaugh has become virtually indistinguishable from Roberts.  Also, in the few cases where they disagree meaningfully (e.g. Dobbs), Roberts is loathe to overturn precedent, even when he originally dissented.  The likelihood of getting 5 justices solidly to the left or right of both of them is low for the foreseeable future. 

Furthermore, it may be difficult for a Republican president to find and confirm a replacement for Alito or Thomas who is equally right wing.  The likelihood of ending up with another Gorsuch style justice from a future R appointment is reasonably high, and that's where precedent could really shift: on issues where the liberal justices take the libertarian view.

The fact that SCOTUS nominations are so much more partisan now actually makes it more difficult for ideologues to be confirmed: Clarence Thomas was confirmed by a Senate with 56 Democrats*, while Trump was constrained by having to nominate judges who Susan Collins or Lisa Murkowski would vote for.

*Yes, most of the Democrats who voted for Thomas were conservative Dixiecrats, but all of them were also more liberal than the Republicans who eventually replaced them.

Both Collins and Murkowski voted for Alito.

Being conservative is not the issue. The issue is being controversial, like making some stupid comments or having scandals like Kavanaugh.

Yes, but that was back when Roe v. Wade wasn't in any danger. 

[David Hume]

Section 2 of VRA declared unconstitutional. (LA is challenging it right now.)

Some death penalty rulings like Kennedy v. Louisiana overruled. (DeSantis is challenging it right now.)

Race based affirmative action in hiring declared unconstitutional. (To be challenged soon.)

[SnowLabrador]

Overturning Obergefell and declaring all gun control unconstitutional.

Sadly, probably this.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Overturning the non-delegation doctrine

[Skill and Chance]

Overturning Obergefell and declaring all gun control unconstitutional.

Sadly, probably this.

How would that work?

Any federal or state law that treats possession or sale of a gun differently from possession or sale of any other generic personal property is unconstitutional?

[politicallefty]

I can't really predict this Court, but my biggest fear is the overturning of the line of precedent starting with Everson, going through Engel, and beyond. I have a hard time coming up with things more offensive than putting religion in public schools.

[I’m not Stu]

I hope our democracy will survive this. Will it?

[Bojack Horseman]

The VRA being struck down altogether.