In a unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court affirmed the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ holding that an order prohibiting a criminal defendant and his attorney from discussing the defendant’s testimony during a mid-testimony, overnight recess does not violate the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Holds That Courts Can Prohibit Consultation About Ongoing Testimony During Overnight Recess
Decision Alert: Supreme Court Holds President Not Authorized To Impose Tariffs Under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act
As summarized in Dykema’s December 2025 edition, the Supreme Court heard oral argument this fall in two consolidated cases (Learning Resources v. Trump and Trump v. VOS Selections) that presented the question of whether the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) authorizes the President to impose tariffs. In a 6-3 decision out last month, the Supreme Court held that it does not.
Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Holds President Not Authorized To Impose Tariffs Under the International Emergency Economic Powers ActSupreme Court to Elucidate Federal Court Jurisdiction in Enforcing Arbitration Awards
The Supreme Court will utilize the case of Jules v. Andre Balazs Properties (No. 25-83) to clarify an important jurisdictional question in the enforcement of domestic arbitration awards: whether a federal court, which initially exercises jurisdiction over a claim that was sent to arbitration, is able to later confirm or overturn an arbitration award when there is no other basis for federal-court jurisdiction.
Continue Reading Supreme Court to Elucidate Federal Court Jurisdiction in Enforcing Arbitration AwardsSupreme Court Weighs Whether Negligent Selection Claims Are Preempted By the FAAAA
On March 4, the Supreme Court heard argument in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport, II, a case that presents an important question at the intersection of federal preemption and state tort law: whether common-law negligent selection claims against freight brokers are preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA). The dispute centers on whether such claims impermissibly regulate a broker’s core services—particularly the selection of motor carriers—or instead fall within the statute’s safety savings clause preserving state authority over motor vehicle safety.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Weighs Whether Negligent Selection Claims Are Preempted By the FAAAADecision Alert: Supreme Court Vacates Stay on Injunction to Block California Transgender Nondisclosure Policy
On March 2, 2026, in Mirabelli v. Bonta (No. 25A810), the Supreme Court blocked a California law that prohibited public school officials from disclosing a student’s gender identity at school to their parents without the student’s consent, even if the parents expressly asked for the information.
Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Vacates Stay on Injunction to Block California Transgender Nondisclosure PolicySupreme Court Considers Whether Idaho’s Ban on Transgender Participation in Women’s Sports Violates Equal Protection
In Little v. Hecox, the Supreme Court is considering whether Idaho’s Fairness in Women’s Sports Act violates the Equal Protection Clause by barring transgender women and girls from participating on female-designated sports teams in public schools. The case, argued alongside West Virginia v. B.P.J., places before the Court a closely watched dispute at the intersection of equal protection doctrine, sex-based classifications, and athletic regulation.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Considers Whether Idaho’s Ban on Transgender Participation in Women’s Sports Violates Equal ProtectionDecision Alert: Supreme Court Unanimously Holds That There Is a “Reasonable Time” Limit To Challenge Void Judgments
On January 20, 2026, in Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton, the Supreme Court unanimously held that litigants do not have unlimited time to challenge judgments as void; instead, they must file any such challenge within a “reasonable time.” The decision resolved an 11-1 circuit split, affirming the Sixth Circuit and concluding that all the other circuit courts to address this question have been improperly allowing litigants to seek to vacate void judgments with no time limit at all.
Continue Reading Decision Alert: Supreme Court Unanimously Holds That There Is a “Reasonable Time” Limit To Challenge Void JudgmentsGrant Alert
Salazar v. Paramount Global
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear Salazar v. Paramount Global, a case that could significantly clarify the scope of the Video Privacy Protection Act (“VPPA”) and its application to modern digital media platforms. The case asks who qualifies as a “consumer” under a federal privacy statute enacted in the bygone videotape era but increasingly invoked in litigation involving online content and data sharing.
Continue Reading Grant AlertGrant Alerts
Trump v. Barbara / Trump v. Washington
The Supreme Court granted review of President Trump’s Executive Order No. 14160, addressing the application of birthright citizenship. The grant follows—and has drawn heightened attention because of—the Court’s earlier decision staying a lower court’s nationwide injunction of the Executive Order. Although courts have long interpreted the Fourteenth Amendment
Supreme Court Debates Applicability of Federal Rule to Void Default Judgments
On November 4, 2025, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton (24-808) to consider whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) imposes a time limit on motions seeking to set aside a void default judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Continue Reading Supreme Court Debates Applicability of Federal Rule to Void Default Judgments