Supreme Court tees up argument dates on major gun, trademark, and social media disputes
Kaelan Deese
Video Embed
The Supreme Court this week scheduled oral arguments for seven more cases this fall, some with eventual rulings that will define the 2023 term.
Starting in October, justices will consider cases including a trademark dispute over the phrase “Trump too small,” whether public officials can block constituents on the platform formerly known as Twitter, and an appeal against a ruling that would bar the government from stripping gun rights from people subjected to domestic violence restraining orders.
CHRISTIE SUPER PAC UNDERSCORES HIS ‘FIGHTER’ RECORD IN FIRST NEW HAMPSHIRE RADIO AD
A 6-3 ruling last summer found that “history and tradition” would determine whether a gun regulation is constitutional under the Second Amendment. The justices will soon consider whether the government can ban guns from people subjected to domestic violence restraining orders in U.S. v. Rahimi on Nov. 7. The case surrounds a criminal defendant who is also facing charges for a string of shootings, complicating the matter
Former President Donald Trump’s namesake will be the subject of a Nov. 1 trademark dispute known as Vidal v. Elster, which is also a First Amendment test on whether a mark can be denied protection if it contains criticism of a public figure or official, in this case, concerning a line of T-shirts that say “Trump too small.”
The high court has only announced the dates for 13 oral arguments so far for the next term, with a majority of those dates consisting of one argument per day, rather than the occasional two. Of the seven new case arguments announced this week, only one day will feature two back-to-back arguments.
Those two arguments will take place on Halloween in a pair of social media cases that test whether public officials may block constituents from their official social media profiles. The cases are O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier and Lindke v. Freed.
On Oct. 30, the justices will hear Culley v. Marshal, which concerns whether property owners have a due process right to a hearing to determine if police had probable cause to seize their property.
The justices will also hear Department of Agriculture v. Kirtz on Nov. 6 and Rudisill v. McDonough on Nov. 7.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The next possible chance for the justices to grant additional cases for the 2023 term will happen at the end of this month during the court’s “long conference,” and while a significant portion of cases are granted out of that process, many of them won’t have oral arguments set until spring of next year.
Oral arguments at the high court will resume on the first Monday of October.