The Supreme Court of the United States' (SCOTUS) current term is due to end later this month. Amid the wave of decisions expected in the coming weeks are several cases that will have major implications for the November election.
As the Guardian noted on Saturday, this year marks the third full term of the 6-3 conservative SCOTUS majority made possible by now-convicted felon Donald Trump's addition of three far-right justices. the significance of the upcoming decisions is compounded by the fact that Republican-appointed justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas have refused to recuse themselves despite both judges' spouses showing multiple gestures of solidarity to January 6 insurrectionists.
Columbia University law professor Olatunde Johnson said that Martha-Ann Alito's flying of two flags associated with the insurrection "raises the question of whether Alito should have recused himself from these cases, and should still recuse himself from the ultimate decisions" in two cases involving Trump's role in the deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol.
READ MORE: Flag outside Alito's home 'literally carried by insurrectionists': J6 investigator
Those cases — Trump v. United States and Fischer, Joseph W. v. United States — pertain to the ex-president's claim of absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts carried out while in office, and a January 6 participant's challenge of the legality of charges against him, respectively. Johnson said the Court is likely well-aware of the political implications of its upcoming ruling in Trump's immunity case.
"If the court issues an expansive ruling on immunity for a former president, that will raise questions about partisanship and ideology, and certainly influence the election," Johnson told the Guardian.
And even if Trump's immunity claim is rejected by the Court, SCOTUS' decision in the Fischer case could still weaken Department of Justice special counsel Jack Smith's indictment of the ex-president in the DC election interference case. The plaintiff in that case is questioning the charge of obstruction of an official proceeding, which make up two of Trump's four felony charges in that indictment. Should Fischer prevail, Smith would only be prosecuting Trump for conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy against rights.
Another major case to be decided is Idaho v. United States, which pertains to the conflict between the Gem State's abortion ban and the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA). Under EMTALA, any hospital that receives federal funding (most hospitals receive federal funds through Medicare) is obligated to treat all patients that come to their emergency rooms — including patients experiencing ectopic pregnancies, in which abortion is sometimes necessary to save the life of a pregnant individual.
READ MORE: 'Want these people gone': Pregnant women seen as 'radioactive' in red state emergency rooms
Maya Manian, who is a law professor and reproductive rights expert at American University's Washington College of Law, told the Guardian that there are "horror stories of pregnant patients who have suffered horrible medical consequences such as unnecessary hysterectomies because they could not get emergency medical care under the state’s abortion ban."
Justices are also weighing a challenge to the availability of the drug Mifepristone, which is a commonly prescribed abortion pill that the Guardian reports is used in roughly 60% of abortions nationwide. An estimated 57 million people capable of pregnancy would be affected if the Court were to side with the anti-abortion activists bringing the case.
President Joe Biden has made the restoration of abortion rights a cornerstone of his reelection campaign, and consistently reminds audiences on the campaign stump that Trump has proudly taken credit for appointing the SCOTUS justices who overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.
Click here to read the Guardian's full report.
READ MORE: Supreme Court agrees to hear case that could aid Trump's efforts to delay his trial