Supreme Court Considers Final Petitions Before Summer Recess

Why it matters locally: The Supreme Court's consideration of firearm possession cases, particularly those related to individuals under 21, could affect gun laws in Mississippi given the state's significant Second Amendment protections and existing regulations regarding firearm sales and possession.

---

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court held its final conference for the term, addressing 30 petitions and applications, including 10 new relisted cases. This session occurred the day before the court released its last opinions of the term.\ \ Among the cases heard were several consolidated petitions related to firearm possession. These cases question whether laws prohibiting individuals under the age of 21 from possessing firearms violate the Second Amendment. The court considered these after its decision in *United States v. Hemani*, which ruled that prohibiting a marijuana user from possessing firearms violated the Second Amendment. The specific cases include *National Rifle Association v. Glass*, *McCoy v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives*, *West Virginia Citizens Defense League, Inc. v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives*, *Bivens v. Second Amendment Foundation*, and *Picon v. United States*. The court may grant review in one of these cases or return them to lower courts for reconsideration in light of *Hemani*.\ \ Justices also addressed cases concerning appeal waivers, following the court's decision in *Hunter v. United States*. This ruling held that agreements in which criminal defendants waive their right to appeal sentences are unenforceable if they lead to a 'miscarriage of justice.' The court remanded several petitions for further consideration based on *Hunter*. Two specific cases, both titled *Jones v. United States*, remain under review, suggesting the court may require additional time for these particular matters.\ \ The ongoing legal dispute between Apple Inc. and Epic Games, Inc. also returned to the court. Apple petitioned the court, challenging a civil contempt finding related to its App Store policies. A district court found Apple in contempt for its actions following an injunction that required Apple to allow developers to offer alternative payment methods. Apple's petition raises two questions: whether a party can be held in contempt for violating the 'spirit' of an injunction when the order did not explicitly forbid the conduct, and whether the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals created an exception to the court's ruling in *Trump v. CASA* by allowing an injunction to apply to nonparty developers.\ \ Another petition, *Triumph Foods v. Campbell*, challenges a Massachusetts law restricting the sale of pork from pigs housed in specific confinement conditions. This case differs from *National Pork Producers Council v. Ross* due to the involvement of federally regulated pork processors and farmers. The challengers argue the Massachusetts law is preempted by the Federal Meat Inspection Act, claiming it imposes additional requirements on federally inspected facilities. The First Circuit Court of Appeals previously rejected this argument, stating the law regulates sales rather than slaughterhouse operations. Triumph Foods has also requested reconsideration in light of *Monsanto v. Durnell*.\ \ Finally, *Grand v. City of University Heights* involves a religious land-use dispute. Daniel Grand, an Orthodox Jew, invited individuals to his home for prayer gatherings. The city issued a cease-and-desist letter, requiring a special-use permit for a 'place of religious assembly.' Grand, after applying, withdrew the application. Lower courts ruled his First Amendment and Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act claims were premature because the city had not definitively denied the permit. Grand's petition asks whether the usual land-use finality requirement applies when zoning threats are alleged to have chilled religious exercise, or if the injury was complete when the city instructed him to cease home prayer gatherings.