In 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court made several significant decisions that had widespread implications. These rulings included pushing back on the Biden administration’s attempt to change Title IX protections for transgender students, reversing a 40-year precedent supporting the administrative state, and considering the constitutionality of state efforts to curtail Silicon Valley biases online. The Court also ruled on presidential immunity during a consequential time for President-elect Trump and sided with a Jan. 6 defendant in a federal obstruction charge. Some of the top cases considered included Department of Education v. Louisiana, Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, and Trump v. United States.
In the case of Department of Education v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court kept preliminary injunctions in place against the Biden-Harris administration’s new rule expanding the definition of sex discrimination under Title IX. The Court ruled that parts of the rule should not take effect. This decision was in response to concerns that the new rule could affect women- and girls-only spaces and women’s sports. Louisiana led several states in suing the Department of Education over the rule, arguing that it violated rights to privacy and safety. The Court’s ruling was seen as a victory by critics of the rule who argued that it would harm Title IX protections.
In Moody v. NetChoice, LLC, the Court upheld the rights of social media platforms to regulate content and defended their free speech rights. Efforts by Texas and Florida to limit how platforms like Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube regulate content were put on hold by the Court. The laws in question were seen as responses to concerns about bias and censorship on these platforms, particularly against conservative viewpoints. The decision to uphold the platforms’ rights was lauded as a win for free speech.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. United States granted former presidents substantial protection from prosecution, handing a major victory to Donald Trump. The Court did not dismiss the case in question but ensured that Trump would not face trial before the 2024 election. The decision clarified that presidents are not immune from prosecution for their unofficial acts, but also emphasized the importance of the separation of powers. This ruling had implications for Trump’s legal standing as he prepared to take office for a second term as president.
Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce was a case that overturned the 40-year-old Chevron doctrine, which instructed lower courts to defer to federal agencies on ambiguous congressional statutes. The Supreme Court ruled that judges must now exercise independent judgment on agency actions. This decision is expected to make it more challenging for executive branch agencies to regulate areas such as the environment, public health, and workplace safety. The case was brought by Atlantic herring fishermen challenging federal rules on industry-funded monitoring requirements.
In Fischer v. US, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Jan. 6 Capitol riot participant who challenged his federal obstruction conviction. The Court held to a narrower interpretation of the federal statute on obstruction of an official proceeding, reversing a lower court decision. The case was seen as significant in determining the scope of the law in cases related to the events of Jan. 6. The ruling was criticized by the Justice Department, which argued that Fischer’s actions were an attempt to disrupt the certification of the 2020 election results.
