Welcome to the Oct. 13 edition of Robe & Gavel, Ballotpedia’s newsletter about the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) and other judicial happenings around the U.S.
We travel carrying our words.
We arrive at the ocean.
With our words we are able to speak
of the sounds of thunderous waves.
We speak of how majestic it is,
of the ocean power that gifts us songs.
We sing of our respect
and call it our relative.
– Ofelia Zepeda
“Carrying Our Words”
We’re back, dear reader. And we’ve got plenty more federal court updates for you. Are you ready? Let’s gavel in!
Follow Ballotpedia on X and Bluesky or subscribe to the Daily Brew for the latest news and analysis.
We #SCOTUS and you can, too!
Grants
SCOTUS has accepted one new case to its merits docket since our Oct. 6 issue. To date, the court has agreed to hear 41 cases for the October 2025-2026 SCOTUS term. SCOTUS dismissed one case after it was accepted.
Click the links below to learn more about this case:
- Hunter v. United States originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and concerns a defendant’s right to appeal a sentence.
Arguments
The Supreme Court will hear four arguments this week. Click here to read more about SCOTUS’ current term.
Click the links below to learn more about these cases:
Oct. 14
- Bowe v. United States concerns post-conviction relief for federal prisoners.
- The questions presented: 1. “Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(1) applies to a claim presented in a second or successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. […] Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(E), “[t]he grant or denial of an authorization by a court of appeals to file a second or successive application shall not be appealable and shall not be the subject of a petition… for a writ of certiorari.”
2. “Whether 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(E) deprives this Court of certiorari jurisdiction over the grant or denial of an authorization by a court of appeals to file a second or successive motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.”
- Ellingburg v. United States concerns the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act.
- The questions presented:”Whether criminal restitution under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act (MVRA) is penal for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause.”
Oct. 15
- Louisiana v. Callais concerns allegations of racial gerrymandering in Louisiana’s congressional voting district maps and Thornburg v. Gingles (1986).
- The questions presented: “1. Did the majority err in finding that race predominated in the Legislature’s enactment of S.B. 8?
“2. Did the majority err in finding that S.B. 8 fails strict scrutiny?
“3. Did the majority err in subjecting S.B. 8 to the Gingles preconditions?
“4. Is this action non-justiciable?”
- Case v. Montana concerns whether law enforcement can enter a home without a search warrant on less than probable cause that an emergency is happening.
- The questions presented: “Whether law enforcement may enter a home without a search warrant based on less than probable cause that an emergency is occurring, or whether the emergency-aid exception requires probable cause.”
Opinions
SCOTUS has not ruled on any cases since our Oct. 6 edition. The court has not issued rulings in any cases so far this term.
Federal court action
Nominations
President Donald Trump (R) has not announced any new Article III nominees since our Oct. 6 edition.
The president has announced 27 Article III judicial nominations since taking office on Jan. 20, 2025. For more information on the president’s judicial nominees, click here.
Committee action
The Senate Judiciary Committee has reported five new nominees out of committee since our Oct. 6 edition.
- Rebecca Taibleson, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
- David Bragdon, to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
- Lindsey Freeman, to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina
- Matthew Orso, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina
- Susan Rodriguez, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina
Confirmations
The Senate has confirmed one nominee since our Oct. 6 issue.
Vacancies
The federal judiciary currently has 53 vacancies, 52 of which are for lifetime Article III judgeships. As of publication, there were 18 pending nominations.
According to the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, there were eight upcoming vacancies in the federal judiciary, where judges have announced their intention to leave active judicial status.
For more information on judicial vacancies during President Trump’s term, click here.
Do you love judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? We figured you might. Our monthly Federal Vacancy Count monitors all the faces and places moving in, moving out, and moving on in the federal judiciary. Click here for our most current count.
Need a daily fix of judicial nomination, confirmation, and vacancy information? Click here for continuing updates on the status of all federal judicial nominees.
Or, keep an eye on our list for updates on federal judicial nominations.
Correction: In our Oct. 6 edition of Robe & Gavel, there was an error in our Grants section. We did not include that SCOTUS also accepted Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC. We regret the error.
Looking ahead
We’ll be back on Nov. 3 with a new edition of Robe & Gavel. Until then, gaveling out!
Contributions
Myj Saintyl compiled and edited this newsletter, with contributions from Sam Post and Ellie Mikus.