SCOTUS Rulings on Emergency Docket

In *Mirabelli v. Bonta*, SCOTUS sided with parents, blocking California's policy of concealing a child's gender transition from them at school. The ruling reinstates a lower court injunction, arguing the policy likely violates parents' rights to direct their children's upbringing and religious development. The court found that the California policies interfered with parents' right to freely exercise their religion. In *Malliotakis v. Williams*, the court put a hold on a New York court order to redraw the state's 11th Congressional District. The NY trial court had ruled that the district unlawfully weakened the political power of Black and Latino voters. Justice Alito argued the lower court's order amounted to "unadorned racial discrimination". Critics like Justices Kagan and Jackson have expressed concerns that SCOTUS is too quick to intervene on the emergency docket. Kagan argued the court is making decisions without full briefing or oral argument. Justice Jackson stated the increasing willingness of the court to get involved in cases on the emergency docket is a real unfortunate problem. Kavanaugh defended the court's emergency docket activity, attributing the rise in emergency petitions to congressional gridlock and presidents testing the limits of executive authority. He argues that administrations "push the envelope in regulations" leading to litigation and requests for emergency relief. The Supreme Court must act on these requests when they land at One First Street. Some observers see a pattern of the court favoring policies aligned with the Trump administration via the emergency docket. A recent analysis found the Trump administration had an 84% success rate at the Supreme Court through emergency orders. The consistent principle has been to preserve existing or legislatively enacted maps against last-minute judicial alteration.