The Supreme Court begins its new term on Monday, October 5, 2026, with a docket featuring cases on climate change, firearm regulations, and executive branch authority. Among the first cases to be heard is a dispute regarding whether federal laws, such as the Clean Air Act, prevent local governments from suing energy companies in state courts over the effects of climate change. The term follows a period where the Court’s conservative majority has established new legal standards for evaluating the constitutionality of gun control measures.
The climate litigation, *Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County*, involves a 2018 lawsuit by Colorado local governments seeking damages from ExxonMobil and Suncor. The companies argue that state-level claims are preempted by federal law, while the local governments allege they were misled about the impact of fossil fuels on greenhouse gas emissions. Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from this case on September 28, 2026, without providing an explanation, though he has previously reported financial interests in the energy sector.
In December 2026, the Court is scheduled to hear arguments on whether state bans on AR-15s and similar semiautomatic rifles are constitutional. The consolidated cases, *Viramontes v. Cook County* and *Grant v. Higgins*, will test the "historical tradition" standard established in the 2022 *Bruen* decision. Additionally, the justices are considering a request from the Trump administration to review the constitutionality of federal laws that prohibit felons from possessing firearms, a category that represents one of the most frequently prosecuted federal crimes.
A ruling in favor of the energy industry could set a precedent for other emerging sectors, such as artificial intelligence, by establishing that only federal guardrails are valid for technologies with national implications. For religious organizations and families, a pending case regarding Colorado’s universal preschool funding will determine if religious schools can be excluded from state programs for refusing to admit LGBTQ families. This follows previous rulings where the Court sided with a web designer and a baker who separately challenged Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws.
The term will also coincide with the 2026 midterm elections, with the Court already weighing in on emergency applications related to Missouri's congressional maps and the Trump administration's proposed restrictions on mail-in voting. In *Republican National Committee v. Mi Familia Vota*, scheduled for December, the justices will review an Arizona law requiring proof of citizenship for voter registration. These rulings will define the legal framework for election administration and political donor disclosure for organizations like Americans for Prosperity, influencing how campaigns are funded and conducted in the coming years.