Several justices said they were concerned that common interactions between government officials and the platforms could be affected by a ruling for the states.
The justices are already grappling with other blockbuster cases that will shape the future of free speech online, the power of federal government agencies and access to the most widely used abortion medication.
In nearly four hours of arguments, several justices questioned aspects of laws adopted by Republican-dominated legislatures and signed by Republican governors in Florida and Texas in 2021. But they seemed wary of a broad ruling.
Three states—Ohio, Indiana and West Virginia—and various industry groups asked the high court to put the EPA plans on hold while they work to defeat the rules in the lower courts.
In more than two hours of arguments, both conservative and liberal justices raised questions of whether Trump can be disqualified from being president again because of his efforts to undo his loss in the 2020 election, ending with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The case marks the first time the justices will be considering a constitutional provision that was adopted after the Civil War to prevent former officeholders who “engaged in insurrection” from holding office again.
Conservative Supreme Court justices on Wednesday voiced support for weakening the power of federal regulators, but it was not clear whether a majority would overturn a precedent that has guided American law for four decades.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday passed up a chance to intervene in the debate over bathrooms for transgender students, rejecting an appeal from an Indiana public school district.
Chief Justice John Roberts turned his focus to the promise, and shortcomings, of artificial intelligence in the federal courts, in an annual report that made no mention of Supreme Court ethics or legal controversies.
The rule is being challenged by three energy-producing states—Ohio, Indiana and West Virginia—as well as industry groups and individual businesses.
Conservative and liberal justices voiced concerns that ruling for a couple challenging a provision of the 2017 tax bill would threaten other provisions of the tax code.
The agreement hammered out with state and local governments and victims would provide billions of dollars to combat the opioid epidemic. The decision also has implications for other major product liability lawsuits settled through the bankruptcy system.
The policy, agreed to by all nine justices, does not appear to impose any significant new requirements and leaves compliance entirely to each justice.
Indiana and Arkansas have filed similar lawsuits, while the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to decide whether state attempts to regulate social media platforms such as Facebook, X and TikTok violate the Constitution.
Even some conservative justices sounded skeptical of arguments that the agency, created after the 2008 financial crisis to regulate mortgages, car loans and other consumer finance, violates the Constitution in the way it is funded.
Thousands of Black, Latino and other minority business owners are scrambling to prove that their race puts them at a “social disadvantage” after a federal judge declared a key provision of a popular Small Business Administration program unconstitutional.
Thursday’s decision means settlement money meant for thousands of victims and their relatives and for local and state governments could be delayed.
The Indiana Builders Association said the Supreme Court ruling provides builders and developers “more certainty in the federal permitting process,” and called the decision “a win for common-sense regulations and housing affordability.”
The court held that the administration needs Congress’ endorsement before undertaking so costly a program.
In a defeat for gay rights, the Supreme Court’s conservative majority ruled Friday that a Christian graphic artist who wants to design wedding websites can refuse to work with same-sex couples.
