Texas cases take center stage in 2024-25 U.S. Supreme Court term – The Daily Texan

The U.S. Supreme Court began its new term on Monday, October 7, with Texas playing a central role in several high-profile cases.

One such case, Garland v. VanDerStok, revolves around a Fort Worth judge’s ruling that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives exceeded its authority by requiring background checks for “ghost gun kits” – firearms without serial numbers that consumers can assemble Purchased parts.

During Tuesday’s argument, the court questioned U.S. Attorney General Elizabeth Prelogar about whether the term “weapon,” which appears in various federal, state and campus regulations, should extend to items that can be easily converted into firearms. Prelogar said the term encompasses more than just complete

assembled firearms.

“Nothing in Congress’s use of the term ‘weapon’ suggests that it must currently function as a weapon of war to qualify,” Prelogar said in response to a question from Justice Samuel Alito, who asked for clarification of the definition.

In addition to the VanDerStok case, the court will hear a Biden administration lawsuit against Tennessee over its law banning gender-affirming care for minors. The administration later sued under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment

this term.

Although the case originates in Tennessee, the petitioners are calling for a broader decision that could impact similar laws across the country, including a Texas law that currently imposes similar restrictions on gender-affirming care. A ruling in favor of the petitioners could open the door to challenges to Texas Senate Bill 14.

“The Sixth Circuit’s decision implicates several conflicts over the application of the Equal Protection Clause to laws directed at transgender people,” the federal government said in its appeal. “And this court’s intervention is urgent because Tennessee’s law is part of a wave of similar bans denying transgender youth access to the health care they, their parents and their doctors have all deemed necessary.”

The court is also expected to hear cases on the scope of administrative authorities’ right to sue on behalf of their citizens. One such case is Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas, an Andrews County case involving the commission’s placement of nuclear storage facilities in the state.

David Spence, a professor of energy law and regulation, said the key question is whether Texas can legally challenge the NRC’s decision in court.

“The question is whether the NRC’s decision is even reviewable in court, at least with respect to these parties involved,” Spence said.

These cases are part of a broader trend of Texas cases reaching the Supreme Court. Of the 50 states, nearly a fifth of cases originated in Texas. Lucas A. Powe Jr., Anne Green Regents chair at the School of Law, said because Texas has predominantly Republican-appointed judges, it sees greater challenges from conservative organizations.

“A second (reason) is that Texas does a lot of crazy things and that leads to cases,” Powe said. “Third, Texas is the second most populous state in the United States, so we would obviously expect more cases to come forward.”