Full Breakdown
Supreme Court’s New Term: Climate Liability, Gun Rights, and Immigration Detention at Stake
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Cases to Be Heard
The Court’s new term opens on Monday, October 5 with oral arguments in three high-profile cases that could reshape national policy.
- Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County – Colorado municipalities argue that oil companies misled the public about climate change and should pay for local flood, wildfire and drought costs. Arguments begin October 5.
- Viramontes v. Cook County – Plaintiffs challenge Illinois’s ban on AR-15-style rifles, invoking the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Arguments are set for December 2.
- Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha – The administration seeks review of a lower-court ruling that the Trump-era policy of mandatory detention without bond hearings for undocumented immigrants violates federal law. The Court agreed to hear the dispute on October 1.
Background & Context
The Boulder lawsuit, filed in 2018, alleges that Suncor and Exxon Mobil concealed climate impacts of their products, causing the county to spend millions on mitigation. The companies argue that the Clean Air Act preempts the state-law claims. The Trump administration filed a brief supporting the oil firms, warning that the suit could “disintegrate” the federal system.
Cook County’s 2021 ordinance bans possession, sale and transfer of assault-style rifles such as the AR-15. The challenge tests the Supreme Court’s 2022 *Bruen* framework, which requires gun regulations to be rooted in the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
The immigration case stems from a 2025 guidance that reinterpreted the Immigration and Nationality Act to treat any non-citizen who entered illegally as an “applicant for admission,” subject to mandatory detention. Lower courts are split, with most judges rejecting the policy while the Fifth and Eighth Circuits have upheld it.
Data & Statistics
- Gallup poll (Sept 1-17, 2026): 34 % approve of the Court, 61 % disapprove.
- Fox News survey: 38 % approval of the justices, 45 % say they are “too conservative.”
- U.S. Marshals Service logged 370 threats against federal judges as of July 1, a 31 % year-over-year rise.
Official Statements & Responses
Chief Justice John Roberts warned that overruling precedent could undermine the legal system. Justice Amy Barrett described intimidation of judges as “crossing a line.” Legal analyst Thomas Dupree noted the chief justice’s “institutionalist” role amid institutional pressure. The Trump administration’s brief framed the climate case as a threat to federal authority, while the ACLU’s Tan called the detention policy “cruel, inhumane and unlawful.”
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
Polls diverge sharply on public confidence in the Court, with Gallup showing a 34 % approval rate versus Fox News’ 38 % approval. The climate case also contains an unresolved jurisdictional question: the Supreme Court must first decide whether it can review the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision before the case proceeds to trial.
What’s Next
- October 5 – Climate-change liability arguments.
- December 2 – AR-15 ban arguments.
- December 8 – Arizona voter-registration proof-of-citizenship case.
- Early next year – Immigration detention arguments (date not yet set).
The outcomes will reverberate across environmental policy, gun regulation, and immigration law, testing the Court’s willingness to check executive power and shape the nation’s legal landscape for years to come.