1 Trending: Media Shrug At Aborting Down Syndrome Baby But Cry ‘Eugenics’ At Sydney Sweeney’s Cup Size

2 Trending: Pro-China Rich Guy Neville Roy Singham Draws Growing Scrutiny Over Far-Left Activism

3 Trending: Todd Blanche At DOJ Should Mean Accountability For The Media’s Russia Hoax And So Much More

4 Trending: How The University Of California Became A Stooge For China’s Anti-America Warfare

Here Are The Biggest Outstanding Supreme Court Cases To Keep An Eye Out For

Here are the biggest remaining cases to keep an eye out for as the high court finishes its 2025 term.

Share Article on Facebook

Share Article on Twitter

Share Article on Truth Social

Share Article via Email

Americans across the country are gearing up to celebrate the country’s 250th birthday. But before that happens, the U.S. Supreme Court will release several high-profile decisions of great constitutional importance.

From presidents’ power over so-called “independent agencies” to the constitutionality of “birthplace citizenship,” here are the biggest remaining cases to keep an eye out for as the high court finishes its 2025 term.

National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission

This case stems from a 2022 lawsuit brought by the National Republican Senatorial and Congressional Committees and then-Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, and then-Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, against the Federal Election Commission (FEC) over a provision of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). They alleged that the provision — which limits coordinated spending campaign between political parties and candidates — violates the First Amendment.

The Supreme Court will determine whether the FECA limits violate the First Amendment “either on their face or as applied to party spending in connection with ‘party coordinated communications,’” according to Oyez.

[READ: Campaign Finance And The First Amendment Take Center Stage At SCOTUS]

This case centers around President Trump’s March 2025 firing of Democrat Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

While granting the Trump administration’s request to temporarily pause a lower court blockade on Slaughter’s removal, the high court also agreed to take up and address whether existing statutory restrictions on the president’s ability to remove members of so-called “independent agencies” like the FTC violate existing separation of powers. The justices also notably indicated they will decide whether to overturn the precedent established in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935).

As The Federalist previously reported, Humphrey’s Executor “helped birth what has now become known as the administrative state,” the de-facto “fourth branch of government” comprised of “independent agencies” and other federal departments........

© The Federalist