The U.S. Supreme Court resolved 123 emergency applications during the 2025-26 term, according to a statistical analysis released on October 13, 2026. The term’s activity, which spanned from October 6, 2025, through October 4, 2026, included 44 capital cases, 43 refiled applications, and 36 substantive applications for stays or injunctions in non-capital matters. The report noted a shift in the court’s handling of requests from the Trump administration compared to the previous year.
The "interim docket"—also known as the "emergency" or "shadow" docket—consists of non-merits matters where litigants seek immediate intervention. Unlike merits cases, which receive full briefing and oral argument, these matters are often resolved through summary orders. In theory, these orders are temporary measures to preserve the status quo, but they frequently involve high-profile issues like immigration, elections, and executive power where a delay in ruling could render legal relief ineffective.
Data from the 2025-26 term shows the Trump administration filed nine substantive applications, a decrease from 21 the prior term. The court granted relief in 56% (five of nine) of the administration’s requests this term, down from a 90% grant rate last term. Additionally, cases involving the administration took an average of 26 days to resolve, compared to an average of 15 days for all other substantive applications. Public disagreement among the justices remained common, appearing in 61% of all substantive applications.
The court denied all 41 requests to pause executions in capital cases during the term. However, it granted two of the three requests by states to allow executions to proceed after lower courts had halted them, including a case involving Christa Pike in the final week of the term. Refiled applications—cases where a justice denies a request in chambers and the applicant refiles with a different justice—reached a 21-term high of 43, though all were denied without noted dissent.
The Supreme Court’s handling of the interim docket affects federal workers, immigrants, and individuals on death row. During the 2025-26 term, the court resolved 123 emergency matters, with substantive grant rates holding steady at 50% for all applicants. While the Trump administration’s success rate on this docket dropped from 90% to 56%, their nine applications still shaped policy on immigration and executive power.
Ordinary citizens and government employees would notice the impact of these rulings through the enforcement or suspension of federal policies. For example, a stay of a lower court’s injunction can mean a specific executive order or agency rule takes effect immediately. The court’s decisions in these 123 cases provided written explanations in 39% of substantive matters, an increase from 31% last term.
Justices appointed by presidents of the same party disagreed together in 91% of cases with noted dissents. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson led the court with 15 noted disagreements, while Justice Amy Coney Barrett noted none. As the court moves into the 2026-27 merits term, the precedent established by these interim orders will continue to govern the immediate implementation of federal laws and regulations. The next statistical pack covering the upcoming term is expected in late 2027.