The dispute comes from Colorado — but it could have national implications for Donald Trump and his political fate.
Several of the court's conservative justices expressed deep skepticism of the current framework. But all three left-leaning justices offered support for keeping the system in place.
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a dispute about whether Donald Trump should be disqualified from the ballot after the Capitol riot three years ago.
Trump's team vowed to appeal the decision. If it's in front of the U.S. Supreme Court by Jan. 5, Trump's name will stay on the ballot. Legal experts say the question is likely to keep coming up.
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, whose funeral is Tuesday, is being remembered as a Supreme Court trailblazer. After retiring from the bench in 2006, she worked to expand civics education in schools.
The court's action sets up a collision between the Food and Drug Administration's 23-year study and supervision of mifepristone, and the circumstances under which it can be prescribed.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the law to ban "children" from "adult live performances" that feature sexual conduct. While the law doesn't refer to drag shows, it is widely seen as aimed at them.
If so, the decision would be a small retreat from the Supreme Court's sweeping decision on gun rights last year.
If the federal law falls, so would similar laws in most states, and other important gun laws.
The ATF says bump stocks convert a semi-automatic weapon into a machine gun by firing multiple rounds with a single pull on the trigger. Machine guns have been banned under federal law since 1934.
The case dates back to a presidential primary debate to 2016 and Sen. Marco Rubio's mocking of candidate Donald Trump as having "small hands."
The cases — from Michigan and California — echo issues raised in a now-defunct suit against then-President Donald Trump for blocking his critics on Twitter.
Several justices have faced ethics questions in recent months, but the Supreme Court has so far resisted imposing a code of ethics.
The case involved an emergency challenge to the final stages of development of the 303-mile pipeline, which is to span from northwestern West Virginia to southern Virginia.
The works have earned Sotomayor $3.7 million since she joined the court in 2009. Her taxpayer-funded staffers have been deeply involved in organizing speaking engagements intended to sell the books.