The Supreme Court of the United States kicked off its new term on Monday, October 6, 2025, and it’s already shaping up to be one for the history books. With a docket packed full of high-stakes cases—many of them touching on former President Donald Trump’s sweeping assertions of executive power—legal experts and court watchers alike are bracing for a term that could redefine the balance between the branches of government, reshape voting rights, and chart new territory for LGBTQ rights and more.
According to coverage from Axios, the court’s conservative majority is poised to deliver a string of victories on issues that largely unite the right. The justices have loaded their schedule with cases that could have far-reaching consequences for presidential authority, the future of the Voting Rights Act, and the rights of LGBTQ Americans. And, as AP News reports, the justices are expected to devote much of the next ten months to evaluating Trump’s expansive claims of presidential power—a major thrust of the term that’s already generating intense debate across the political spectrum.
Let’s break down the biggest cases and what’s at stake.
Trump’s Executive Power in the Spotlight
At the heart of the term are several cases that could either affirm or rein in the powers of the presidency. The Supreme Court has already shown a willingness to side with Trump’s aggressive assertions of authority in preliminary rulings. For example, a recent decision allowed the Trump administration to cut $783 million in research funding, a move that drew a sharp rebuke from liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. In her dissent, Jackson quipped, “This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this administration always wins.” (AP News)
But the real tests are still to come. In early November, the court will hear a pivotal case on the legality of Trump’s sweeping tariffs, which he imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Both the U.S. Court of International Trade and a federal appellate court have already struck down these levies, ruling that Trump overstepped his authority. Trump, however, has framed the challenge as existential, insisting that a loss would “literally destroy the United States of America,” according to Axios. The Supreme Court has agreed to fast-track the case, and arguments are set for early November.
December brings another blockbuster: the justices will consider Trump’s power to fire independent agency members at will. This case could overturn—or at least drastically narrow—a 90-year-old precedent that required presidents to show cause, such as neglect of duty, before removing Senate-confirmed officials. The court’s conservative majority has already allowed such firings to take effect while the case is pending, even after lower courts found them illegal. The three liberal justices have consistently dissented, warning of the consequences for agency independence (AP News).
Another major case, likely to be argued in late winter or early spring 2026, involves Trump’s executive order denying birthright citizenship to children born in the U.S. to parents who are in the country illegally or temporarily. Lower courts have blocked the order as unconstitutional, citing more than 125 years of precedent, including an 1898 Supreme Court ruling. The administration’s appeal sets up a showdown over one of the most fundamental questions of American citizenship (AP News).
Voting Rights, Redistricting, and Campaign Finance
The court will also weigh in on the future of voting rights and the integrity of U.S. elections. In mid-October, the justices are set to hear a case about congressional redistricting in Louisiana. The Republican-led state has effectively abandoned its defense of a map that elected two Black members of Congress and is now urging the court to reject any consideration of race in redistricting. If the court sides with Louisiana, it could allow Republican-controlled states across the South to draw new maps that virtually eliminate majority Black House districts—long considered Democratic strongholds (AP News).
Meanwhile, the court will review a challenge brought by Vice President JD Vance (when he was still in Congress) about whether to reverse a precedent that limits coordination between campaigns and political parties. The government, in a May brief, called this case “the rare case that warrants an exception” to its usual defense of federal statutes (Axios). No date for arguments has been set, but the outcome could have a profound impact on campaign finance rules and the influence of money in politics.
LGBTQ Rights, Transgender Athletes, and Conversion Therapy
On the social front, the justices are taking up several cases that could redefine the rights of LGBTQ Americans. On Tuesday, October 7, the court will hear arguments about bans passed by nearly half of U.S. states on therapy aimed at changing sexual orientation or gender identity. One of the cases challenges Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy, with a therapist arguing that the state infringes on her right to free speech by dictating what she can say to patients (Axios).
The court has also agreed to hear two cases from Idaho and West Virginia about bans on transgender women and girls participating in certain sports competitions. Transgender athletes won lower court rulings in both states, but the Supreme Court’s decision could set a national precedent. The conservative majority has already handed a string of losses to the LGBTQ community, including by upholding a state ban on gender-affirming care for minors and allowing the Trump administration’s ban on transgender troops to take effect (Axios).
Other Major Issues: Guns and the Death Penalty
The term isn’t just about Trump or social issues. The court will also tackle a significant Second Amendment case challenging Hawai’i’s gun regulations, which require permission to bring firearms onto private property and public areas like parks and beaches. Additionally, the justices have agreed to hear a case that could clarify the rules for sentencing intellectually disabled people to death, building on a 2002 decision that found such executions unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment (Axios).
Looking Ahead: The Court’s Future and Political Stakes
The term’s outcomes could have political ramifications that stretch far beyond the courtroom. Justice Samuel Alito, who turns 76 in April 2026, is reportedly considering retirement next summer. If he steps down, Trump would have the chance to nominate a younger, like-minded conservative to the bench, likely securing confirmation from the Republican-led Senate (AP News). Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas, at 77, is on track to become the longest-serving justice in U.S. history by 2028 and shows no sign of stepping down.
With the Supreme Court’s new term underway, the nation is watching closely. Each decision has the potential to reshape not only the law but the very fabric of American society. Whether the court will continue its conservative trajectory or surprise observers with unexpected rulings remains to be seen—but one thing’s for sure: this term is set to leave a lasting mark.
