MEMBERSHIP OF RECENT SUPREME COURT

Years
1961	Warren 1	Clark 1	Frankfurter	Whittaker	Stewart 1	Brennan 1	Harlan	Douglas 1	Black 1
1962	Warren 2	Clark 2	Frankfurter nv	White nv	Stewart	Brennan 2	Harlan 2	Douglas 2	Black 2
1963	Warren 3	Clark 3	Goldberg 3	White 3	Stewart 3	Brennan 3	Harlan 3	Douglas 3	Black 3
1964	Warren 4/5	Clark 5	Goldberg 4/5	White 5	Stewart 5	Brennan 4/5	Harlan	Douglas 4/5	Black 4/5
1966	Warren 6	Clark	Fortas 6	White	Stewart	Brennan 6	Harlan	Douglas 6	Black 6
1968	Warren 7	Marshall 7	Fortas 7	White	Stewart 7	Brennan 7	Harlan	Douglas 7	Black
1972	Burger	Marshall 8	Rehnquist	White 8	Stewart 8	Brennan 8	Powell	Douglas 8	Blackmun
1973	Burger 9	Marshall 9	Rehnquist	White	Stewart 9	Brennan 9	Powell 9	Douglas 9	Blackmun 9
1976	Burger 10	Marshall	Rehnquist 10	White 10	Stewart 10	Brennan	Powell 10	Stevens	Blackmun 10
1977	Burger	Marshall 11	Rehnquist	White 11	Stewart 11	Brennan 11	Powell 11	Stevens 11	Blackmun 11
1978	Burger 39	Marshall	Rehnquist 39	White	Stewart 39	Brennan	Powell 39	Stevens 39	Blackmun
1986	Burger	Marshall 12/13	Rehnquist	White 13	O’Connor 13	Brennan 12/13	Powell 12/13	Stevens 12/13	Blackmun 12/13
1987	Rehnquist 15/16	Marshall 14	Scalia 15/16	White 15/16	O’Connor 15/16	Brennan 14	Powell 14/15/16	Stevens 14	Blackmun 14
1989	Rehnquist 17/18/19/20	Marshall	Scalia 17/18/19/20	White 17/18/19/20	O’Connor 17/18/19/20	Brennan	Kennedy 17/18/19/20	Stevens 19	Blackmun
1990	Rehnquist 21/28	Marshall 22/28	Scalia 21/28	White 21/22/28	O’Connor 21/28	Brennan 22/28	Kennedy 21/28	Stevens 21/22	Blackmun 22/28
1991	Rehnquist 23/24	Marshall	Scalia 23/24	White 23/24	O’Connor 24	Souter 23/24	Kennedy 23/24	Stevens	Blackmun
1992	Rehnquist	Thomas	Scalia	White	O’Connor 25/26	Souter 25/26	Kennedy 25/26	Stevens 25/26	Blackmun 25/26
1995	Rehnquist 27/29	Thomas 27/29	Scalia 27/29	Ginsberg	O’Connor 27/29	Souter 29	Kennedy 27/29	Stevens	Breyer 29
1997	Rehnquist 30	Thomas 30	Scalia 30	Ginsberg 30	O’Connor 30	Souter 30	Kennedy 30	Stevens 30	Breyer 30
2000	Rehnquist 31/33/35	Thomas 33/35	Scalia 33/35	Ginsberg 31/32/34	O’Connor 31/32/33/34/35	Souter 31/32/34	Kennedy 31/32/33/35	Stevens 31/32/34	Breyer 31/32/34
2002	Rehnquist	Thomas	Scalia	Ginsberg 36	O’Connor 36	Souter 36	Kennedy 36	Stevens 36	Breyer 36
2003	Rehnquist 41/42	Thomas 41	Scalia 41	Ginsberg 37/40/42	O’Connor 37/40/41/42	Souter 37/40/42	Kennedy 37/41	Stevens 37/40/42	Breyer 37/40/41/42
2004	Rehnquist	Thomas	Scalia	Ginsberg 43	O’Connor 43	Souter 43	Kennedy 43	Stevens 43	Breyer 43
2005	Rehnquist 45	Thomas 45	Scalia 44/45	Ginsberg 38/44/46/47	O’Connor 46	Souter 38/44/46/47	Kennedy 38/44/45/47	Stevens 38/44/46/47	Breyer 38/44/45/46/47
2006	Roberts nv	Thomas	Scalia	Ginsberg 48	Alito	Souter 48	Kennedy 48	Stevens 48	Breyer 48
2007	Roberts 49/50/51	Thomas 49/50/51	Scalia 49/50/51	Ginsberg	Alito 49/50/51	Souter	Kennedy 49/50/51	Stevens	Breyer
2008	Roberts 52/55	Thomas 52/55	Scalia 52/55	Ginsberg 53/54	Alito 52/55	Souter 53/54	Kennedy 52/53/54/55	Stevens 52/53/54	Breyer 52/53/54
2009	Roberts 56	Thomas 56	Scalia 56	Ginsberg	Alito 56	Souter	Kennedy 56	Stevens	Breyer
2010	Roberts 58/59/60/61	Thomas 58/59/60/61	Scalia 58/59/60/61	Ginsberg 57	Alito 58/59/60/61	Sotomayor 57	Kennedy 57/58/59/60/61	Stevens 57/59	Breyer 57
2011	Roberts 63	Thomas 63	Scalia 63	Ginsberg 62	Alito 63	Sotomayor 62	Kennedy 62/63	Kagan 62	Breyer 62
2012	Roberts 65/66	Thomas	Scalia	Ginsberg 64/65/66	Alito	Sotomayor 64/65/66	Kennedy 64/65	Kagan 64/nv/66	Breyer 64/65/66
2013	Roberts 67	Thomas 67	Scalia 67	Ginsberg 68	Alito 67	Sotomayor 68	Kennedy 67/68	Kagan 68	Breyer 68
2014	Roberts 69/71/72	Thomas 69/71/72	Scalia 69/71/72	Ginsberg 70	Alito 69/71/72	Sotomayor 70	Kennedy 69/70/71/72	Kagan 70	Breyer 70
2015	Roberts 74/75	Thomas 75	Scalia 75	Ginsberg 73/74/76	Alito 75	Sotomayor 73/74/76	Kennedy 73/74/75/76	Kagan 73/74/76	Breyer 73/74/76
2016	Roberts	Thomas	VACANCY	Ginsberg 77/78	Alito	Sotomayor 77/78	Kennedy 77/78	Kagan 77/nv	Breyer 77/78
2017	Roberts 79/80/81	Thomas 79/80/81	Gorsuch 79/80/81/nv	Ginsberg 82	Alito 79/80/81	Sotomayor 82	Kennedy 79/80/81/82	Kagan 79/82	Breyer 79/82
2018	Roberts 83/84/85/86/87/88	Thomas 83/84/85/87/88	Gorsuch 83/84/85/87/88	Ginsberg 86	Alito 83/84/85/87/88	Sotomayor 86	Kennedy 83/84/85/87/88	Kagan 85/86	Breyer 85/86
2019	Roberts 89/90/91/92/	Thomas 90/92	Gorsuch 90/92	Ginsberg 89/91/93	Alito 90/91/92	Sotomayor 89/91/93	Kavanaugh 90/91/92/93	Kagan 89/91/92/93	Breyer 89/91/92/93
2020	Roberts 94,95,96,97,98,99	Thomas 96,97	Gorsuch 95,96,97,98	Ginsberg 94,95,98,99	Alito 96,97	Sotomayor 94,95,98,99	Kavanaugh 96,97,98	Kagan 94,95,97,98,99	Breyer 94,95,97,98,99
2021	Roberts 100,101,102,103, 104,105	Thomas 100,101,102, 103,104	Gorsuch 100,101,103, 104,105	Barrett 100,101,102, 103,104,105	Alito 100,101,103, 104,105	Sotomayor 101,102,105	Kavanaugh 100,101,102, 103,104,105	Kagan 101,102, 105	Breyer 101,102,105
2022	Roberts 106, 107, 109, 110,111	Thomas 106,107,108, 109,110	Gorsuch 106,107,108, 109,110	Barrett 106,107,108, 109,110	Alito 106,107,108, 109,110	Sotomayor 111	Kavanaugh 106,107,108, 109,110,111	Kagan 111	Breyer 111
2023	Roberts 112,113,114, 115,116	Thomas 114,115,116	Gorsuch 114,115,116	Barrett 113,114,115, 116	Alito 114,115,116	Sotomayor 112,113	Kavanaugh 112,113,114, 115,116	Kagan 112,113	Jackson 112,113
2024	Roberts 117,118,119,120, 121,122,123	Thomas 118,119,121,122,123	Gorsuch 118,119,120,121,122,123	Barrett 117,118,119, 120,121,123	Alito 118,119,120,121,122,123	Sotomayor 117,120	Kavanaugh 117,118,119, 120,121,122,123	Kagan 117,120	Jackson 117,120,122

Note: Italics indicates appointment by Republican President; bold indicates Chief Justice.

1 Mapp v. Ohio- search and seizure right protected by exclusionary rule.

2 Engel v. Vitale- state school board prescribed, non-denomination prayer outlawed.

3 Gideon v. Wainwright- counsel right for serious criminal cases.

4 Escobedo v. Illinois- counsel right goes back to stationhouse interrogation.

5 Reynolds v. Sims- reapportionment case, both state legislative chambers must be based on population.

6 Miranda v. Arizona- police required to read suspects their rights.

7 Witherspoon v. Illinois- state law can’t exclude jurors with general anti-death penalty views.

8 Furman v. Georgia- death penalty struck down, due to its arbitrary application.

9 Roe v. Wade- state laws outlawing abortion rejected, violates 14^th amendment due process liberty/privacy right.

10 Gregg v. Georgia- death penalty permitted, 2-stage, guilt v. sentence process, defendant character and crime circumstances.

11 Coker v. Georgia- death penalty excessive for crime of rape.

12 Thornburgh v. American Col.- extensive abortion information, reporting, post-viable requirements violated privacy rights.

13 Batson v. Kentucky- exclusion of blacks from criminal juries violates 6^th and 14^th amendment fair trial, equal protection.

14 Booth v. Maryland- victim impact statement can’t be used at death penalty sentencing stage, focus on defendant.

15 McCleskey v. Kemp- general statistical disparities in death penalty impositions do not bar death sentence.

16 Tison v. Arizona- major participants in murder, not just actual killer, can get death sentence.

17 Stanford v. Kentucky- minor execution for murder doesn’t violate 8^th amendment, as no national consensus.

18 Penry v. Lynaugh- constitutional to execute mentally retarded, but condition must be considered at sentencing stage.

19 Richmond v. Croson- 14^th amendment equal protection violated by local gov’t racial setasides quotas with no specific past discrimination.

20 Webster v. Reproductive- states could prohibit public facilities and state employees from conducting abortions and counseling them.

21 Ohio v. Akron Center- requirement of one parent notification of minor abortion constitutional, if judicial bypass included.

22 Metro Broadcasting v. FCC- limited minority broadcast licensing preferences doesn’t violate 5^th amendment equal protection, diversity programming desirable.

23 Rust v. Sullivan- federal agency gag order prohibiting abortion counseling in family planning using federal funds okay, as Congress can choose policies to fund.

24 Payne v. Tennessee- victim impact statements can be used in death penalty sentencing stage, shows specific harm done.

25 Planned Parenthood v. Casey- undue burden standard for abortions, permits informed consent, 24 hour waiting period, but not husband notification.

26 Lee v. Weisman- school-invited clergy praying at junior high school graduation violates 1^st amendment establishment clause.

27 U.S v. Lopez- federal anti-gun possession in school zone law is unconstitutional, as no interstate commerce justification.

28 Westside Board v. Mergens- federal equal access law constitutional, school must let religious group also use after school facilities.

29 Capitol Square v. Pinette- Klax can put cross on public square devoted to public forum issues, as 1^st amendment free speech.

30 Clinton v. Jones- no constitutional grant of immunity from civil lawsuits for a sitting President.

31 Dickerson v. U.S.- precedent, Miranda upheld, Congress can’t say Miranda warnings not needed for voluntary confessions.

32 Santa Fe v. Doe- school district student-led prayer before football game violated establishment clause, as school policy, event, and property.

33 U.S. v. Morrison- federal Violence against Women Act providing civil remedy unconstitutional (woman college student raped, sued), as not interstate commerce.

34 Stenberg v. Carhart- state partial birth abortion law unconstitutional, as undue burden to women and provided no health of mother exception.

35 Bush v. Gore- state court violated equal protection clause by ordering standardless vote recount that would vary across counties and precincts.

36 Atkins v. Virginia- execution of mentally retarded violates 8^th amendment, as evolving national standards of decency.

37 Lawrence v. Texas- state law criminalizing private homosexual sexual relations violates 15^th amendment, liberty due process clause.

38 Roper v. Simmons- execution of minors violates 8^th amendment, as evolving national standards of decency.

39 California Regents v. Bakke- med school strict racial quota violated equal protection clause, but race can be “a” criterion.

40 Grutter v. Bollinger- med school use of race as one factor in admissions permissible as it promotes diversity in student body.

41 Gratz v. Bollinger- undergraduate admissions of automatic points to minorities for admissions does violate equal protection clause.

42 Nevada v. Hibbs- Family Medical Leave act upheld, person can sue for money damages in federal court under 14^th amendment Congressional action permitted.

43 Rasul v. Bush- Guantanamo detainees, though non-citizens, have right to have habeas corpus petition heard in federal court.

44 Gonzalez v. Raich- Congress under interstate commerce clause can ban private marijuana growing, despite state law permitting medical use of marijuana.

45 Van Orden v. Perry- a 10 Commandments display existing for 40 years by a secular group on state public land was constitutional.

46 McCreary v. ACLU of Kentucky- a 10 Commandments display citing the King James Version on courthouse walls by local officials and a Christian minister was unconstitutional.

47 Kelo v. New London city- city taking private property for economic development purpose (shopping center) didn’t violate 5^th amendment “taking” clause.

48 Ramdan v. Rumsfeld- Presidential-established military commission procedures to try terrorist detainees must be approved by Congress.

49 Gonzalez v. Carhart- Congressional ban on partial birth abortion was constitutional, as intact D&E procedure never medically necessary.

50 Ledbetter v. Goodyear- limited women’s damage recovery to only 6 months under federal equal pay law.

51 Parents v. Seattle school district- race cannot be sole reason for student school assignment, as lacks narrowly tailored remedy and compelling government purpose.

52 Baze v. Rees- lethal injection execution does not violate 8^th amendment cruel and unusual prohibition.

53 Kennedy v. Louisiana- states may not impose death penalty for rape of a minor, as execution for crimes against individuals is limited to where victim’s death occurs.

54 Boumediene v. Bush- Guantanamo detainees entitled to a prompt habeas corpus hearing.

55 D.C. v. Heller- D.C. gun ban is unconstitutional under 2^nd amendment right to bear arms.

56 Ricci v. DeStefano- New Haven city throwing out test results that benefited only white/Hispanic firefighters violated federal law prohibiting race discrimination.

57 Graham v. Florida- Life without parole for juveniles convicted in a crime not involving death violates 8^th amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment (Roberts agreed only with the specific case’s outcome, not the broad constitutional ruling).

58 Berghuis v. Thompkins- A suspect who has received the Miranda warnings, and who remains silent but does not invoke his Miranda rights, can have a later uncoerced statement of guilt used to convict him.

59 Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project- court upheld constitutionality of a federal law banning "material support" to foreign terrorist organizations, with material support including humanitarian aid but not free speech about such organizations (unless the speech is coordinated with the group).

60 McDonald v. Chicago- court held that the 2nd amendment prohibition on Congress infringing on the right to keep and bear arms extends to state and local governments, though governments can pass regulations limiting that right (thereby prohibiting felons and mentally ill from owning guns, and prohibiting the carrying of guns in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings).

61 Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission- under the 1st amendment free speech guarantees the federal government may not ban political spending by corporations in candidate elections.

62 Brown v. Plata- under the 8th amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, inmates' basic health needs had been violated by severe and long-term prison overcrowding, necessitating immediate action that could include freeing thousands of California prisoners.

63 Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes et al.- a narrow definition of a federal rule of civil procedure did not permit 1.5 million women employees of Wal-Mart to file a class action lawsuit against the company.

64 Miller v. Alabama- mandatory life without parole for minors violates the 8th amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment; courts must take into account the nature of the crime and the youth of the defendant.

65 Arizona v. United States- states cannot undermine federal law by criminalizing immigrants not carrying registration documents, criminalizing illegals seeking employment, or authorizing state officials to arrest anyone believed to have committed a deportable offense; states can require police to check immigration status of detainees suspected to be in the country illegally.

66 National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services- Obama's health care law is constitutional, due to the Congress' taxing power.

67 Shelby County Alabama v. Holder, Attorney General- Section 4 coverage formula for Section 5 of Voting Rights Act requiring southern states get federal preclearance of voting practices changes is unconstitutional, as it violates the 10th amendment right of states and fundamental principle of equal state sovereignty, since it is based on a 49-year-old outdated formula of past state racial discrimination.

68 U.S. v. Windsor, executor of estate of Spyer- the federal Defense of Marriage Act, barring federal benefits to same sex marriages is unconstitutional, violating the 5th amendment due process and equal protection clauses, as the states have the sovereign power to define marriage and the federal government cannot treat some marriages within the same state as unequal or second class compared to other marriages.

69 Burwell v. Hobby Lobby, court ruled that corporations controlled by religious families cannot be required by Obamacare federal law to pay for contraception coverage for their female workers, under the federal 1st amendment religious freedom clause.

70 Hall v. Florida, court strikes down Florida's IQ cutoff as too rigid in deciding when mentally disabled must be spared death penalty; based on 8th amendment cruel and unusual publishment clause.

71 Town of Greece v. Galloway, court upholds town boards starting meetings with sectarian prayers, rejects a 1st amendment challenge by offended residents.

72 McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, as a violation of 1st amendment freedom of expression rights, court strikes down aggregate federal election contribution limits by individuals (so individuals can give maximum contributions to as many federal candidates as they wish).

73. Obergefell et al v. Hodges, Director, Ohio Dept. of Health. Marriage is a fundamental right of individual dignity and autonomy, therefore the 14th amendment due process and equal protection clauses guarantee the rights of same sex couples to marry.

74. King et al. v. Burwell, Secretary of Health and Human Services. Federal law Affordable Care Act was ambiguous regarding whether federal subsidies for low income applied only to health exchanges set up by state governments, so court upheld the federal law by considering it as a whole and considering Congress' intent to improve the individual health insurance marketplace.

75. Glossip v. Gross. Death row inmates failed to prove that a particular drug used in lethal injection created a demonstrated risk of severe pain compared to available substitutes, so state execution method did not violate 8th amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

76. Texas Dept of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project. Court held that the language of the Fair Housing Act of 1968 provides for disparate impact liability of developers and governments, not just intent to racially discriminate, but plaintiffs must prove that defendant's policies caused the racial disparity.

77. Whole Woman's Health v. Texas Health Department. States cannot place restrictions on abortion clinics and doctors that unduly burden a woman's access to abortion, such as requiring clinics to meet the same building codes as hospitals and requiring doctors to obtain admitting privileges at a local hospital.

78. Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin. State university use of race as one of many factors in their admissions process does not violate the 14th amendment equal protection clause, as state used a holistic review of applicants that considered many factors, and its use of diversity served a clear educational purpose.

79. Trinity Lutheran Church v. Comer. Missouri state constitution violated federal 1st amendment free exercise clause by denying a church an otherwise available public benefit (playground funds) because of it being a religion.

80. Davila v. Davis. Defendants can't raise an ineffective assistance of counsel claim in federal habeas proceedings if claim was not first raised in state habeas proceedings.

81. California Public Employees' Retirement System vs. ANZ Securities. Pension fund lawsuit under Section 11 of 1933 Securities Act dismissed, because of Section 13's requirement that it be filed within three years.

82. Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado. 6th amendment right to trial limits jury deliberation privacy if there is evidence that a juror made statements exhibiting overt racial bias that casts serious doubt on the fairness and impartiality of the jury's deliberations and resulting verdict.

83. Janus v. AFSCME- state law cannot require state public employees to pay a fee to cover the cost of collective bargaining, as requiring some employees to support a group whose views they may oppose violates the 1st Amendment.

84. Trump v. Hawaii- Trump's travel ban on aliens from nations most at-risk for terrorist infiltration was upheld, as under federal law President has broad authority to bar entry of aliens, and his order was legitimate and religiously neutral on its face.

85. Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission- Colorado Commission, which expressed hostility towards religion in this case, violated 1st amendment free exercise clause rights of Christian baker, who refused to bake a specialized artistic cake for a gay couple.

86. Carpenter v. United States- 4th amendment search and seizure clause protects the expectation of privacy, so police must obtain a search warrant based on probable cause to obtain cellphone company records permitting the tracking of a suspect's movements.

87. National Institute of Family and Life Advocates v. Becerra- State law mandating private crisis pregnancy centers to notify patients that the state provides abortion services violates 1st amendment free speech clause, as it compelled speech on subject that centers opposed.

88. Husted Ohio Secretary of State v. A. Philip Randolph Institute- Ohio law removing registered voters from rolls after they failed to respond to notices asking about residency movement and failed to vote after four more years did not violate National Voter Registration Act specific prohibitions.

89. Department of Commerce v. New York. Federal agency action of including a citizenship question in the planned census did not provide a reasonable explanation, as required by administrative procedures act, as agency's voting rights enforcement argument was contrived.

90. Rucho v. Common Cause. Partisan gerrymandering cases are not justiciable, as they are political questions beyond the federal courts and best left to legislatures.

91. Flowers v. Mississippi. State court violated the 6th and 14th amendments (fair trial, equal protection) by showing discriminatory intent to strike all African American jurors in a death penalty case.

92. American Legion v. American Humanist Association. A 40 foot cross on public land honoring World War 1 soldiers does not violate the 1st amendment's religious establishment clause, as it has a secular meaning and is of historic importance.

93. Apple v. Pepper. While the federal antitrust Clayton Act applies only to immediate buyers being permitted to sue antitrust violators, plaintiff apple i-phone owners are not so distantly removed from apple's app stores (which have an app monopoly), so plaintiffs can sue.

94. June Medical Services v. Russo. The state government cannot require that doctors who perform abortions have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles, as it places an undue burden on the woman patient violating her constitutional right to choose to have an abortion. It provides a substantial obstacle to the woman with no significant health-related benefits.

95. Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia. Title 7 of the federal 1964 Civil Rights Act bars discrimination based on sex, and the term sex includes gays and transexuals. Therefore, private employers and state and local governments cannot fire an employee because they are gay or transexual.

96. Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue. The state department's prohibition of parents using scholarships (provided by a tax credit) at religious schools, even though the state constitution barred government aid to any church schools, was a violation of the free exercise of religion clause of the 1st amendment of the federal constitution.

97. Our Lady of Guadalupe School vs. Morrissey-Berru. Two teachers of religious schools in Los Angeles fired because of alleged age discrimination and breast cancer complications cannot sue their school, because those teachers performed vital religious duties, so the First Amendment's religion clauses protect the school.

98. Trump v. Vance. Regarding New York state's subpoena of President Trump's accounting firm's financial records, Article 2 of the federal constitution and the Supremacy Clause do not require a heightened standard for the issuance of state criminal subpoena to a sitting President. The President can only raise the same objections to a subpoena as any other citizen.

99. Department of Homeland Security vs. Regents of University of California. President Trump violated the federal Administrative Procedures Act by revoking DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), as his executive order was arbitrary and capricious, the government's defense of the order were post hoc rationalizations.

100. Jones v. Mississippi- sentencing body does not need to make a separate factual finding of permanent incorrigibility to sentence a juvenile to life without parole; Miller decisions merely banned mandatory life without parole for juveniles.

101. Fulton v. City of Philadelphia, PA- Philadelphia’s refusal to contract with Catholic Social Services for the provision of foster care services unless CSS agrees to certify same-sex couples as foster parents violates the free exercise clause of the First Amendment; based on specifics of state and city laws.

102. California et al v. Texas et al.- states lack the standing to attack the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act (after Congress removed the individual tax mandate), as they have shown no injury.

103. Johnson v. Guzman Chavez- held that aliens ordered removed from the country who re-entered without authorization were not entitled to a bond hearing, under a federal law; Johnson was ICE Acting Director.

104. Brnovich v. Democratic Nat’l Comm- held that Arizona’s in-person voting in precinct one lives in, and Arizona’s limit on ballot harvesting of mail votes did not violate Voting Rights Act, Section 2, discriminatory intent.

105. Mahanoy School Dist. V. B.L. a Minor- upheld 1^st amendment free speech claim of minor, who was suspended from a JV Cheerleading squad for using profanity on social media protesting her not making varsity squad, as no evidence that her action was disruptive of the school and the school had not generally policed vulgar activity of students outside of school premises.

106. New York Rifle Association v. Bruen, N.Y. State Police Superintendent. Consistent with 2nd amendment right to bear arms, a state cannot require that a person show a special need (proper cause) in order to publicly carry a firearm for self-defense.
107. Carson v. Makin. Maine's prohibition of tuition assistance payments to otherwise qualified religious-affiliated schools violates the free exercise clause of the 1st amendment.
108. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The federal constitution does not confer a right to abortion, so abortion regulation is returned to the states or the people's elected representatives. Reverses Roe and Casey, even though the Mississippi law only outlawed abortions after 15 weeks.
109. Kennedy v. Bremerton School District. The 1st amendment free exercise of religion clause protects the brief, quiet, personal religious observance of a coach on the football field after an athletic event.
110. West Virginia v. EPA. Congress did not grant the EPA authority in the Clean Air Act to require existing power plants such stringent emission caps that they would result in a nationwide transition away from coal.
111. Biden v. Texas. Federal immigration law gives the Biden administration the authority to reverse the Trump-era policy requiring that asylum seekers remain in Mexico during their court cases, since the law uses the word "may" which provides administration discretion.
112. Allen v. Caster. Alabama’s new U.S. House redistricting plan likely violates Section 2 of the federal Voting Rights Act, which bars election practices that abridge or deny the right to vote based on race, and requires that states consider the entirety of the circumstances in their plans.
113. Moore v. Harper. The federal constitution’s stipulation that state legislatures prescribe the manner of holding federal congressional elections did not prohibit the North Carolina state Supreme Court from striking down a state redistricting plan due to partisan gerrymandering.
114. Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College. Harvard and UNC’s admissions processes which extensively consider an applicant’s race violate the 14th amendment equal protection clause and its requirement of strict scrutiny for whenever race is used as a factor.
115. Creative LLC v. Elenis. A private company designing websites can refuse to create websites celebrating same sex marriages or other beliefs that the owner disagrees with, despite a Colorado state anti-discrimination law, because of the federal constitution’s 1st amendment protection of free speech.
116. Biden v. Nebraska. The Biden administration’s Education Secretary cannot use the federal Heroes Act that provides specific student loan waives for war and national emergency purposes to enact a dramatic and new $430 billion loan repudiation program that Congress never clearly authorized.
117. Murthy, Surgeon General v. Missouri. Plaintiff state governments and social media users claims that federal government officials pressured social media users to remove "disinformation" about the Covid pandemic policies were rejected, as they did not have standing to sue since they had demonstrated no harm to themselves.
118. Garland Attorney General vs. Cargill. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms exceeded its legal authority by declaring that bump stocks made firearms into machine guns, since the 1934 National Firearms Act declares a machine gun as permitting continual firing from only engaging the trigger once and bump stocks do not permit semiautomatic rifles to do so.
119. Alexander, South Carolina Senate President v. South Carolina NAACP. The state congressional redistricting map was upheld, as plaintiffs failed to prove that race rather than partisanship or geography played a predominant role in redistricting.
120. U.S. v. Rahimi. Upheld the federal statute that prohibits individuals subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a firearm, as there was a credible threat and being disarmed was temporary.
121. Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Commerce Secretary. The Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their independent judgment regarding whether an agency has exceeded its statutory authority, so a previous court case deferring to federal agencies when federal laws are unclear is reversed.
122. Fischer v. U.S. A 2002 federal law prohibiting the alteration or destruction of a record that is being used in an official proceeding, as well as targeting anyone who "otherwise" attempts to obstruct, influence, or impede any official proceeding does not pertain to this defendant who merely entered the Capitol and delayed the certification of the Presidential electoral votes.
123. Trump v. U.S. Regarding the federal indictment of former President Trump, a President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his core constitutional authority, is entitled to at least presumptive immunity for acts within the outer perimeter of his official responsibility, but has no immunity for unofficial acts.

nv indicates not voting.