Skip to main content
Day.News — Local News. Real Community.
COLUMBUS DAY NEWS
Local News. Real Community.
politics
3 min read

Supreme Court Issues Three Rulings; Senate Panel Backs Bill to Televise Court Proceedings

The Supreme Court issued three opinions Thursday, including a decision that struck down prosecution of a marijuana user under federal gun restrictions. Separately, a Senate committee advanced legislation to require televised Supreme Court proceedings, a move the justices have long opposed.

07/18/2026 · Michigan edition

Advertisement

Advertisement

The Supreme Court released three decisions Thursday, addressing Second Amendment rights, appellate waivers, and the scope of federal court authority over state judgments.

In United States v. Hemani, the court ruled 9-0 that the federal government cannot prosecute Ali Hemani for possessing a firearm while using marijuana. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that the law, as applied to Hemani, who used marijuana approximately every other day, violates the Second Amendment. Gorsuch noted that early American laws the government cited "targeted different kinds of people, did so for different reasons, and operated in different ways." Several justices filed concurring opinions but none dissented from the outcome.

The court voted 8-1 in Hunter v. United States that defendants may appeal convictions or sentences despite having signed agreements not to pursue appeals, provided the appeal would prevent "a miscarriage of justice." Justice Elena Kagan wrote the majority opinion, establishing that an egregious error compelling enough to bring the judicial system into disrepute can override an appellate waiver. The court sent the case of Munson Hunter back to the lower court to apply this standard. Justice Clarence Thomas dissented alone.

In a 5-4 decision in T.M. v. University of Maryland Medical System Corp., Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which restricts federal district courts' power to review state-court judgments, applies regardless of whether a judgment remains subject to further review in state appellate proceedings. Justice Amy Coney Barrett dissented, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Elena Kagan and Neil Gorsuch.

The justices held a private conference Thursday to vote on petitions for review. Orders from that conference are expected Monday at 9:30 a.m. EDT. The court scheduled additional opinion releases for Tuesday at 10 a.m. and next Thursday.

**Legislative Push for Cameras**

The Senate Judiciary Committee advanced legislation Thursday with bipartisan support to mandate televised Supreme Court proceedings. The bill would require the justices to accept cameras in the courtroom unless a majority determine video coverage would interfere with the due process rights of a party to a case.

The justices have resisted televising oral arguments and decisions for years. The committee's approval marks progress for open government advocates pushing for public access, though the legislation faces an uncertain path. Similar bills passed the committee four times in previous Congresses but never reached a Senate floor vote.

**Other Developments**

Richard Hershey, a Louisiana man stopped by police while distributing Christian Vegetarian Association leaflets outside a concert venue six years ago, has petitioned the Supreme Court to allow him to sue the officers for violating his First Amendment rights. A federal appeals court ruled the officers were protected by qualified immunity, which shields government officials from civil rights lawsuits unless they violated "clearly established" law. Hershey's legal team, which includes former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement, argues that "the right to evangelize in public, free of viewpoint-based government suppression, is as clearly established as any right in the firmament."

Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook disclosed that she spent nearly $1.2 million on legal services as her case challenging President Donald Trump's attempt to remove her from office proceeded to the Supreme Court. The State Democracy Defenders Fund paid $696,346 toward her legal costs, while Contina Impact contributed $477,951 for legal work and $143,908 for security services. Three personal friends also made additional security contributions. The justices are expected to rule on Cook's case by the end of June. Legal experts view the case as significant to whether the Federal Reserve can conduct monetary policy independently of political pressure.

Related Topics

Editorial Transparency
AI-Generated · Written by National Desk

Article Ratings

Factual
0.0
Likeable
0.0
Bias
0.0
Objective
0.0

How do you feel about this story?

NA

National Desk

Trust 3.1103384 articles8,231,170 views75% fact accuracy
View Profile

Sign in to follow this author from their profile.

Discussion (0)

Join the Conversation

Join the conversation

Sign in to share your thoughts, reply to readers, and like comments.

Sign in to comment
Sort by:
0 comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

Trending Now

Trending stories will appear here.

More from Michigan

No other local stories are available right now.

Events & Things to Do

Read section →

Upcoming events will appear here.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Keep Reading

Related Stories

More politics stories from Michigan

politics

DNC Files Lawsuit Against Administration Over Agency-Funded Advertising

The Democratic National Committee has initiated legal action against the administration, claiming the use of taxpayer funds for advertisements featuring former President Donald Trump. The lawsuit centers on ads produced by federal agencies that the DNC characterizes as political endorsements.

Read Story →
politics

DNC Sues Trump Administration Over Advertising Expenditures

The Democratic National Committee filed a lawsuit against President Donald Trump's administration on Wednesday. The DNC alleges that recent television advertisements promoting the president's political message used millions in taxpayer dollars inappropriately. This legal action targets the administration's use of government funds for what the DNC describes as political advertising.

Read Story →
politics

Strategists Discuss Midterm Election Messaging, Expected Outcomes

With midterm elections approaching, Democratic and Republican strategists have discussed their parties' final campaign messages. They also identified key states where they anticipate electoral success.

Read Story →
politics

Reporter Highlights Senior Officer Promotions and Transgender Policy

A recent report details observations regarding military promotions and policy changes. The analysis focuses on the advancement of Black and women senior officers, alongside a policy affecting transgender service members.

Read Story →
politics

Supreme Court Justices Weigh Investment Comparisons in Retirement Fund Case

The Supreme Court heard arguments in a case concerning the investment strategies of employee retirement funds. Justices explored how to compare the performance of different investment approaches, particularly when assessing alleged fiduciary imprudence. The central discussion revolved around the necessity of comparing similar investment strategies.

Read Story →
politics

Supreme Court to Hear Asylum Case on Green Card Eligibility

The Supreme Court will review a case concerning whether asylum recipients must maintain their asylum status to qualify for permanent residency. The Justice Department argues current status is required, while petitioners contend the law focuses on a past grant of asylum.

Read Story →
Scroll for more stories