Supreme Court Begins New Term with 'Long Conference'

Why it matters locally: The Supreme Court's decisions on issues like federal immigration policy, voter roll verification, and the regulation of prediction market platforms could have direct implications for South Carolina's administration of elections and state-level regulatory frameworks.

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Supreme Court began its unofficial 2026-27 term with its annual “long conference” on Monday, September 28. During this conference, justices consider petitions for review that accumulated throughout the court’s summer recess. The official start of the new term is scheduled for October 5, the first day of oral arguments. Ahead of the long conference, the Supreme Court issued several decisions. On Friday, September 25, the court allowed the Trump administration to use a modified version of the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements database. This database identifies noncitizens on state voter rolls. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Also on Friday, the Supreme Court, for the third time, declined to allow Missouri to use a congressional map. This map was expected to favor Republicans in the November elections. No public dissents were recorded in this decision. On Thursday, September 24, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to intervene in a dispute concerning third-country removals. These removals involve sending noncitizens to countries not specified in their removal orders. A response to this request was due by 4 p.m. EDT on Monday. **Morning Reads and Judicial Commentary** A New York City mother, Yi Fang Chen, asked the Supreme Court to intervene in her son's admission to Stuyvesant High School. Chen contends that updated affirmative action policies at the selective school, specifically its “Discovery Program,” disadvantage her son, an Asian American student, by allocating more seats to economically disadvantaged students from specific middle schools. Her son scored 558 on the entrance exam, below the 561 cutoff, and she claims the updated program, which increased Discovery seats from 3% to 20% of enrollment, prevented his admission. Chen seeks an emergency ruling to allow her son to attend the school during the case’s progression. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson commented on the Supreme Court’s emergency docket during a speech at the University of the District of Columbia School of Law on Thursday. Jackson stated that the court’s current use of quickly issued, often unexplained orders in controversial cases is “not serving the court or the country well.” She emphasized concerns about the court not adhering to consistent standards for all applications, noting that the emergency docket could become “an end-run around the standard review process” for “privileged litigants.” Judge David Stras of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit also addressed the Supreme Court’s emergency orders. Speaking at William & Mary Law School, Stras said these orders sometimes offer insufficient explanation, creating uncertainty for lower courts. He acknowledged the Supreme Court’s difficult position in balancing detailed explanations with timely decisions. Stras cited the Missouri redistricting case, stating that additional guidance from the Supreme Court would have been “incredibly helpful” for lower courts. In other legal developments, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled on Friday that states can regulate sports-related event contracts on prediction market platforms. This marks a second such ruling against the industry, following a similar decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. Conversely, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, a federal agency, holds exclusive regulatory authority over these markets. New Jersey has appealed the 3rd Circuit's decision to the Supreme Court, with the court's decision on whether to hear the case pending. Simon Lazarus, in The New Republic, discussed potential Supreme Court reform. Lazarus suggested that focusing on an enforceable code of ethics for Supreme Court justices would be a more effective reform effort compared to proposals like adding justices or imposing term limits. He asserted that Supreme Court justices are currently the only federal officials, including lower court judges, not subject to a code of conduct, and that public support exists for addressing this. **The Long Conference Process** The long conference addresses approximately 2,000 petitions each year. Justices primarily discuss and vote on petitions flagged for the “discuss” list by one or more justices, based on input from clerks. Petitions not selected for this list are effectively denied before the conference begins. In recent years, the court has typically granted between five and 15 petitions for argument from the long conference. This year, petitions under potential consideration include those regarding student apparel with phrases like “Let’s Go Brandon,” discovery orders in government information lawsuits, and the application of the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishments” to juvenile life sentences without parole. Following its traditional schedule, the Supreme Court is expected to release a list of granted cases from the long conference on Friday, October 2. An order list detailing denied petitions is anticipated on Monday, October 5, coinciding with the first day of the 2026-27 term. The next private conference is scheduled for Friday, October 9, to review a smaller group of petitions.