Presidential powers, LGBTQ rights and the role of race in elections are among a spate of high-profile issues before the Supreme Court as the justices take the bench Monday to begin a new term.

The court is poised to review 39 argued cases so far, including President Trump’s bid to keep his most significant economic initiative intact and a redistricting case that stands to upend a key provision of the Voting Rights Act. Decisions are expected by summer.

At the same time, the court’s emergency docket continues to bloat with consequential requests that are expected to yield weighty rulings throughout the term.

Here are five key issues to watch as the term gets underway.

Trump docket

Just nine months into his second presidency, a handful of Trump’s efforts to expand executive power have already reached the Supreme Court and are set to be scrutinized by the justices this term.

In November, the justices will weigh Trump’s use of emergency powers to justify global tariffs as he seeks to refashion global trade.

The president used the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which lets the president issue certain economic sanctions in an emergency to counter “unusual and extraordinary” threats, to authorize the sweeping tariffs. The use of that emergency, and whether that is legal, is at the heart of the case before the high court.

But no president had invoked the statute to impose tariffs before Trump, who did so in February to place levies on Canada, China and Mexico before expanding it in April and finally instituting it in late July. Trump placed varied percentages of tariffs on dozens of countries with a baseline 10 percent on several others. Lower courts have said the tariffs were not authorized by the IEEPA statute.

The high court will also hear arguments over Trump’s efforts to fire two independent agency leaders: Federal Trade Commission (FTC) member Rebecca Slaughter and Federal Reserve board of governors member Lisa Cook.

In the Slaughter case, the justices will examine Trump’s contention he can fire independent agency leaders at will — a reconsideration of the court’s 90-year-old precedent that insulated certain agencies from the White House’s whims in upholding the FTC’s removal protections as constitutional.

Cook’s firing was attributed to allegations of mortgage fraud, which she has denied. Her case presents distinct issues from........

© The Hill