As we enter 2025, the Supreme Court’s docket includes several consequential cases that could significantly impact various areas of law. Here’s what practitioners and clients should know about some of the most notable cases:
Ghost Guns and Federal Regulation
In Garland v. VanDerStok, the Court will determine whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives exceeded its authority by regulating “ghost guns” – firearms assembled from kits or 3D printing. The case centers on whether the ATF’s 2022 rule properly classified weapon parts kits and partially completed frames as “firearms” under the Gun Control Act. This decision could have far-reaching implications for federal agencies’ regulatory authority and gun control efforts.
Corporate Liability and Social Media
Facebook v. Amalgamated Bank addresses important questions about corporate disclosure requirements. The Court will consider whether companies must disclose past materialized risks in their risk disclosures, even when those events no longer present ongoing business threats. The ruling could reshape how companies approach securities disclosures and impact future shareholder litigation.
Environmental Regulation
In City and County of San Francisco v. EPA, the Court will examine whether the Clean Water Act permits the EPA to impose general prohibitions in pollution discharge permits without specifying exact discharge limits. This case could significantly affect how environmental regulations are implemented and enforced nationwide.
Disability Rights
Stanley v. City of Sanford, Florida presents an important question about the Americans with Disabilities Act: Can former employees sue over discrimination regarding post-employment benefits? The case involves a retired firefighter challenging changes to disability-related health insurance coverage. The Court’s decision could expand or limit the ADA’s protections for retired workers.
Immigration and Judicial Review
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas will address whether visa petitioners can obtain judicial review when an approved petition is revoked based on non-discretionary criteria. This case could significantly impact immigration attorneys’ ability to challenge visa revocation decisions.
Veterans’ Benefits
In Bufkin v. McDonough, the Court will consider how the “benefit-of-the-doubt” rule applies in veterans’ claims. The case examines whether appeals courts must explicitly verify this rule was properly applied during the claims process. This decision could affect how veterans’ disability claims are reviewed and appealed.
These cases reflect the Court’s continuing engagement with complex regulatory, constitutional, and statutory interpretation questions. The outcomes will likely shape legal practice across multiple disciplines in the coming years. We’ll be following these cases closely and providing updates as decisions are released.
HV Legal remains committed to helping our clients navigate the implications of these important Supreme Court decisions. Contact our office to discuss how these cases might affect your legal interests.
