The court’s docket includes major cases involving immigration, voting rights, gun restrictions, religious freedom and climate change, with several disputes potentially carrying significant implications for federal and state government authority.

The first day of oral arguments includes a closely watched climate case involving efforts by local governments to seek financial damages from energy companies over alleged harms linked to fossil fuels. Billions of dollars could potentially be at stake in the litigation.

The justices are also expected this term to consider whether states may prohibit certain semiautomatic firearms, including AR-15-style weapons, and whether voters can be denied federal election ballots for failing to provide documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote.

Another case will examine whether religious schools that discriminate against LGBTQ+ families can be excluded from taxpayer-funded programs.

The court is also considering whether to take up challenges involving state laws requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in public school classrooms, legal protections for medical providers who mail abortion medication across state lines, and the regulation of prediction markets such as Kalshi and Polymarket.

Those cases are not expected to be resolved before the November midterm elections.

The court is also confronting significant immigration disputes involving the Trump administration.

Among them is a case concerning the administration’s policy of removing immigrants to third countries. The justices have agreed to consider questions including whether the policy complies with federal immigration law, constitutional due-process protections and U.S. obligations concerning the risk of torture or persecution. The case is scheduled for argument during the court’s December session.

The court will also face additional Trump administration appeals, including pending litigation involving immigration enforcement and executive authority.

The new term arrives as the Supreme Court continues to face scrutiny over how its 6-3 conservative majority approaches disputes involving the Trump administration and politically contentious issues.

Genevieve Lakier, a constitutional law scholar at the University of Chicago Law School, said questions surrounding perceptions of the court’s political alignment are likely to remain prominent.

“Is the court a Republican court? Is it resolving disputes in the name of justice or some broader set of principles? I think it’s a very live question,” Lakier said. “This term, like the last, is going to provide fuel to the fire of that question.”

Beyond the cases already accepted for review, the justices could also be asked to intervene rapidly in disputes arising from the midterm elections, adding another layer of significance to a Supreme Court term already packed with major constitutional and political questions.