The Supreme Court will issue opinions in argued cases on Thursday morning. (I’ll be live-blogging the release of opinions over at SCOTUSblog.) The justices still have approximately 34 decisions left to release before they begin their summer recess at the end of June or beginning of July. Here, in brief, are summaries of the as-yet-undecided cases:

1. Vidal v. Elster (argued Nov. 1, 2023): Whether the refusal by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to register a trademark, citing a provision of federal trademark law that prohibits the registration of a trademark that uses the name of another living person unless that person has given permission, violates the First Amendment when the trademark contains criticism of a government official or public figure. The question comes to the court in a dispute arising from Steve Elster’s efforts to register the phrase “Trump Too Small” – prompted by Sen. Marco Rubio’s 2016 reference to the “small hands” of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump – so that Elster could print and sell t-shirts bearing the phrase.
2. United States v. Rahimi (argued Nov. 7, 2023): Whether a federal law that bans the possession of guns by individuals who are the subject of domestic-violence restraining orders violates the Second Amendment, which provides that “[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
3. SEC v. Jarkesy (argued Nov. 29, 2023): Whether the structure and enforcement powers of the Securities and Exchange Commission violate the Constitution.
4. Harrington v. Purdue Pharma (argued Dec. 4, 2023): Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit was correct to approve a multi-billion-dollar bankruptcy plan for Purdue Pharma, the maker of OxyContin, that would release members of the Sackler family, which owned the company but did not declare bankruptcy, from any future liability for claims against them.
5. Moore v. United States (argued Dec. 5, 2023): Whether a provision of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act known as the “mandatory repatriation tax,” which required U.S. taxpayers who owned shares in foreign corporations to pay a one-time tax on their share of the corporation’s earnings, violates the Constitution.
6. Campos-Chaves v. Garland (argued Jan. 8, 2024): Whether the federal government provided adequate notice of an immigration proceeding, allowing the immigration court to enter a deportation order when the non-citizen does not appear.
7. Office of the U.S. Trustee v. John Q. Hammons Fall 2006 (argued Jan. 9, 2024): When the Supreme Court held in 2022 that a federal law imposing higher fees on bankruptcy filers in 48 states is unconstitutional, what should the remedy for that constitutional violation be? z
8. Smith v. Arizona (argued Jan. 10, 2024): Whether the Sixth Amendment, which guarantees a defendant the right to confront the witnesses against him, allows prosecutors to use expert testimony about evidence – here, a report prepared by a different crime lab analyst who no longer worked at the lab and did not testify at trial – that was not itself admitted into evidence, on the grounds that the testifying expert was simply offering his own opinion and that the defendant could have subpoenaed the original analyst.
9. Relentless v. Department of Commerce & Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (argued Jan. 17, 2024): Whether the Supreme Court should overrule or limit its 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, in which it held that when a federal statute is ambiguous, courts should defer to an agency’s interpretation of that law as long as it is reasonable.
10. Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (argued Feb. 20, 2024): Whether the six-year statute of limitations to challenge an action by a federal agency begins to run when the agency issues the rule or instead when the plaintiff is actually injured.
11. Ohio v. EPA (argued Feb. 21, 2024): Whether the Supreme Court should temporarily block a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to reduce air pollution from power plants and other industrial facilities while litigation continues.
12. Moody v. NetChoice & NetChoice v. Paxton (argued Feb. 26, 2024): Whether laws in Florida and Texas that seek to regulate how large social media companies like Facebook and X control content posted on their sites violate the First Amendment
13. McIntosh v. United States (argued Feb. 27, 2024): Whether a district court can enter a criminal forfeiture order when the time limit specified in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure has already passed.
14. Cantero v. Bank of America (argued Feb. 27, 2024): Whether the National Bank Act preempts the application of state escrow-interest laws to national banks.
15. Garland v. Cargill (argued Feb. 28, 2024): Whether a “bump stock” – an attachment that transforms a semiautomatic rifle into a fully automatic, assault-style weapon – is a “machinegun,” which is generally prohibited under federal law.
16. Murthy v. Missouri (argued March 18, 2024): Whether the federal government’s conduct transformed content-moderation decisions by private social media companies into government action and therefore violated the First Amendment, and whether the challengers have a legal right to bring their lawsuit.
17. National Rifle Association v. Vullo (argued March 18, 2024): Whether the head of New York’s Department of Financial Services violated the free speech rights of the National Rifle Association when she urged banks and insurance companies that worked with the NRA to cut their ties with the group.
18. Diaz v. United States (argued March 19, 2024): Whether prosecutors in a drug-trafficking case can call a government witness to provide expert testimony to rebut a defendant’s contention that she did not know that she was carrying drugs.
19. Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. (argued March 19, 2024): Whether an insurer with responsibility for a bankruptcy claim is a “party in interest” that can object to a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code.
20. Gonzalez v. Trevino (argued March 20, 2024): What kinds of evidence must a plaintiff alleging that she was arrested in retaliation for speech protected by the First Amendment show to qualify for the exception outlined in Nieves v. Bartlett, which holds that although plaintiffs must generally show that police did not have probable cause to arrest them, they can also show that they were arrested when others who had not been engaged in protected speech would not have been.
21. Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado (argued March 20, 2024): The latest chapter in a long-running water dispute over the apportionment of the waters of the Rio Grande, and in particular efforts by Texas and New Mexico to settle the dispute over the objections of the federal government.
22. Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe (argued March 25, 2024): Whether Native American tribes that manage their own health care programs are entitled to receive funds from the Indian Health Service to cover the costs associated with services covered by insurance.
23. Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (argued March 26, 2024): Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit correctly rolled back actions by the FDA in 2016 and 2021 that increased access to mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortions in the United States, and whether the groups and physicians challenging the FDA’s actions have a legal right to bring their challenge.
24. Erlinger v. United States (argued March 27, 2024): For purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act, which imposes an enhanced sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm if the defendant has three convictions “committed on occasions different from one another,” should a jury or a judge decide whether the crimes occurred on different occasions?
25. Connelly v. Internal Revenue Service (argued March 27, 2024): Whether the proceeds of a life-insurance policy taken out by a closely held corporation on a shareholder to facilitate the redemption of the shareholder’s stock should be considered a corporate asset when calculating the value of the shareholder’s stock for purposes of the federal income tax.
26. Snyder v. United States (argued April 15, 2024): Whether federal bribery laws make it a crime to accept payment for something a government official has already done, without any prior agreement to take those actions in exchange for payment.
27. Chiaverini v. City of Napoleon (argued April 15, 2024): Whether a claim for malicious prosecution can proceed for a baseless criminal charge, even if there was probable cause for prosecutors to bring other criminal charges.
28. Fischer v. United States (argued April 16, 2024): Whether a federal law that makes it a crime to corruptly obstruct congressional inquiries and investigations can be used to prosecute participants in the Jan. 6, 2021, attacks on the U.S. Capitol.
29. Thornell v. Jones (argued April 17, 2024): Whether a federal appeals court in California misapplied the Supreme Court’s 1984 decision in Strickland v. Washington, which sets out the test to determine whether a lawyer’s performance was so inadequate that it violated the Constitution, in the case of death row inmate Danny Lee Jones.
30. City of Grants Pass v. Johnson (argued April 22, 2024): Whether an ordinance in an Oregon city that bars people who are homeless from using blankets, pillows, or cardboard boxes for protection from the elements while sleeping within the city limits violates the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
31. Department of State v. Muñoz (argued April 23, 2024): Whether the denial of a visa to the non-citizen spouse of a U.S. citizen infringes on a constitutionally protected interest of the citizen and, if so, whether the government properly justified that decision.
32. Starbucks Corporation v. McKinney (argued April 23, 2024): Whether, when evaluating requests from the National Labor Relations Board for injunctions under Section 10(j) of the National Labor Relations Act, which gives federal district courts the power to grant preliminary injunctive relief as they deem “just and proper,” courts should apply the traditional, stringent four-factor test or a more lenient standard.
33. Moyle v. United States (argued April 24, 2024): Whether a federal law, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which requires emergency rooms at hospitals that participate in Medicare to provide “necessary stabilizing treatment,” can sometimes trump an Idaho law that makes it a crime to provide an abortion except in a handful of narrow circumstances, including to save the lave of the mother or in cases of rape or incest.
34. Trump v. United States (argued April 25, 2024): Whether (and, if so, to what extent) a former president has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for his official acts while in office.