The Supreme Court's session is coming to a close in the next five weeks, leaving a limited window for the high court to decide on a handful of hot-button cases before it wraps up for the summer.
Most recently, the Supreme Court ruled against Andy Warhol in a Prince copyright case and upheld California's animal welfare law. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson authored her third majority opinion since she joined the bench after the court sided with a transgender immigrant in a deportation case.
DEBT LIMIT: MULVANEY SAYS 14TH AMENDMENT ROUTE COULD BE HARMFUL AS TALKS CONTINUE
The high court still has several cases to get through on topics such as same-sex weddings, affirmative action, and other areas of immigration. All decisions are expected by the end of June when the Supreme Court traditionally recesses for the summer.
Here is a look at the six remaining high-profile cases that the Supreme Court could rule on in the coming weeks.
Student loan forgiveness: Biden v. Nebraska and Department of Education v. Brown
The Supreme Court has yet to rule on whether it is constitutional for President Joe Biden to carry out his plan to wipe out up to $10,000 in federal student loans for those with an annual income of up to $125,000 and up to $20,000 erased for those who received Pell Grants during their schooling.
Millions signed up to take advantage of the forgiveness plan, but its existence was immediately challenged by a coalition of six GOP-led states. The Supreme Court is now deliberating on the constitutionality of the Biden administration's executive action in Biden v. Nebraska and Department of Education v. Brown.
Biden authorized the forgiveness plan under the 2003 HEROES Act, which grants executive power to relieve student loan debt in times of national emergency or war. The emergency Biden used was the COVID-19 pandemic, which the president declared was "over" last year. The COVID-19 national emergency ended in April with Biden's signature and the public health emergency expired on May 11.
Same-sex weddings and businesses: 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis
The court is determining whether businesses have the right to deny a customer services over objections to same-sex marriage due to their religious beliefs.
In 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis, business owner Lorie Smith argues that a Colorado "public accommodation" law is infringing on her religious beliefs, as the law bans discrimination on sexual orientation. She creates websites but does not want to be compelled to do so for a same-sex wedding.
Justices examined the free speech implications of the law and how the First Amendment intersects with LGBT rights broadly. The decision could have profound ramifications for both religious liberty and the LGBT community.
Deportation of illegal immigrants: Pugin v. Garland and Garland v. Cordero-Garcia
These two cases examine a key issue looking at the scope of the federal government's ability to deport illegal immigrants. The court will face even more scrutiny over its decision in Pugin v. Garland and Garland v. Cordero-Garcia, as it will come after Title 42 has expired.
The Supreme Court will decide whether a federal law that allows for deportation for "an offense relating to obstruction of justice” extends to situations where there is not a current investigation or court case.
Many criminal proceedings operate under state rather than federal law. The U.S. Board of Immigration Appeals often has to determine whether a state crime fits with a federal crime to use as justification for deportation.
Affirmative action: Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina
The court is examining colleges and universities' consideration of race and ethnicity in applications. Higher education institutions have used affirmative action for decades, with several court cases serving as precedents. However, 62% do not believe race and ethnicity should be a factor in college admissions, according to a February Reuters/Ipsos poll.
Students for Fair Admissions sued the University of North Carolina and Harvard University, alleging the institutions' policies discriminated against Asian Americans and white students. The cases are filled with anecdotal evidence about admissions processes and statistics looking at acceptance rates.
The universities, on the other hand, have argued that race is just one of a handful of factors that is considered while going through the admissions process.
Adopting Native American children: Haaland v. Brackeen
In Haaland v. Brackeen, the court is assessing a challenge to the constitutionality of the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act, which gives extended family members, tribal members, and, if no other options are available, another Native family priority for adopting Native children.
One of the petitioners in the case — Chad and Jennifer Brackeen — almost had their adopted Navajo Nation child taken away from them due to the law. The case calls into focus the long-standing questions of Native American sovereignty in the United States.
Federal regulation of water pollution: Sackett v. EPA
Sackett v. EPA marks the latest case in a decadeslong debate over the parameters of the Clean Water Act. At issue in this case is an Idaho couple who ran afoul of the law when trying to build a home nearly 16 years ago.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The court could soon decide the type of definition that the Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers should use when crafting and enforcing regulations on the "Waters of the United States."
Waters that are subject to the Clean Water Act face tougher regulations, which Republican lawmakers have fought against for years on behalf of many farmers and developers that want fewer types of water falling under WOTUS jurisdiction.