Decision season starts Thursday for the Supreme Court, kicking off a race against the clock to release this term’s opinions before the court’s summer break begins.

The justices are set to hand down major decisions implicating the role of religion in public life, efforts to restrict gender-affirming care and a host of environmental issues.

Here’s a look at the major cases this term:

Gender-affirming care

Case name: United States v. Skrmetti

What they’re weighing: Is Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for minors constitutional?

Tennessee’s SB1 prohibits healthcare providers from prescribing puberty blockers or hormones to allow a transgender minor to live consistent with their gender identity. The Biden administration and a group of transgender adolescents and doctors argue the law violates the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The Trump administration abandoned the government’s challenge upon taking office but has urged the court to still decide the case.

What it will impact: Similar laws passed by Republican-led legislatures in roughly half the country.

Racial gerrymandering

Case name: Louisiana v. Callais and Robinson v. Callais

What they’re weighing: Is Louisiana’s congressional map an unconstitutional racial gerrymander?

This case is the latest stage of the long-running legal battle over Louisiana’s congressional map design following the 2020 census. Initially, the Republican-led Legislature overrode the Democratic governor’s veto to approve a map with only one majority-Black district. A district court struck it down for likely violating the Voting Rights Act by diluting the power of Black voters. At issue now is a new design, which the legislature drew with an additional Black-majority district to prevent the courts from taking over. A group of white voters argues the legislature went too far in boosting Black voter power, and it is now an unconstitutional racial gerrymander in violation of the 14th Amendment.

What it will impact: States’ latitude to draw additional minority-majority districts to remedy a Voting Rights Act violation.

Age-verification laws

Case name: Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton

What they’re weighing: Is Texas’s age-verification law for porn websites constitutional?

Texas’s HB 1181, passed in 2023, requires websites to verify users that are 18 years or older if its content is more than one-third “sexual material harmful to minors.” The porn industry, backed by the ACLU, is challenging the law, which it claims is materially identical to the federal Child Online Protection Act – a measure the Supreme Court ruled unconstitutional in 2002.

What it will impact: Similar laws limiting children's access to online pornography in nearly half the country.

Publicly-funded charter schools

Case name: Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond and St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Drummond

What they’re weighing: Can Oklahoma officials approve the nation's first publicly funded religious charter school?

In 2023, the Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board approved a contract for St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, which would be the nation's first publicly funded religious charter school. Oklahoma's Attorney General Gentner Drummond (R) contests the school’s approval. This case tests whether the school complies with the First Amendment’s religion clauses.

What it will impact: The bounds of religion in publicly funded education.

Parent opt-outs for LGBTQ schools

Case name: Mahmoud v. Taylor

What they’re weighing: Must Montgomery County, Md., provide parents an opt-out option from LGBTQ-inclusive books in elementary schools?

In 2022, the Montgomery County Board of Education introduced LGBTQ-inclusive books in elementary schools. Initially, parents could opt out, but the county later eliminated the option. A group of parents with religious beliefs at odds with the books’ teachings argue the lack of an opt-out option violates their religious rights under the Constitution’s Free Exercise Clause.

What it will impact:........

© The Hill