What cases did the US Supreme Court decide at the end of the 2024 term? | Courts News

The Supreme Court of the United States has ended up with the decisions of the blockbuster, which touches everything from health coverage to school reading lists.

On Friday, the Court left his final decisions before taking a few months of intervals of 2024. Nine justices on the bench will be reconstructed in October.

But before their departure, the titles of justice. President Donald Trump decided to restrict a major conservative majority in a major victory, a six-man conservative majority and universal instructions to determine the country’s domestic executive measures.

Trump, for a long time, canceled the court decision as an attack on the executive power.

The conservative majority of the Supreme Court came together again in the other two verdict. One decision has allowed parents to give up the school materials that include LGBTQ, and the other took the lead to place obstacles to prevent young people online pornography.

However, a decision on the access of health, some conservative justices were aligned with three left-wing counterparts. General Overview of the final decisions of the 2024 term.

The court supports preventive care requirements

In case Kennedy V Braidwood managementThe Supreme Court saw the fractures of ordinary ideological units.

Three Conservative Justice – Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh and John Roberts, Sonia Sotomayor, Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson and Elena Kagan were united with the liberal branch of the court.

Stake was the ability to determine which prevention of the government’s insurance providers of the country’s insurance providers.

Protest the Constitution of Care Act, the former President Barack Obama became a legislative part of the health entrance.

This case, the Act authorizes the panel of the health professionals – under the Department of Health and Human Services – determined the importance of covering any prevention services at any cost.

Enterprises of a group of people and Christian owners, protested against the legality of this position.

They claimed that the expert panel had a violation of the destination clause, and it is part of a part that requires a president of a certain political purpose to the president.

The group previously filed a command against the decision of the task group covered as preventive care of Prevention drugs.

This special instruction was not made in the decision of the Supreme Court. However, the article for the majority has confirmed the Constitution of the Task Group, because the Task Group was a constitution, because it was made in “low officers”, which did not need the approval of the Senate.

The court gives NOD to age restrictions in Texas’s Porn

Several states, including Texas, require users to protect the minors from inconsistent material before entering pornographic websites.

However, the Texas law came within the Microscope of the Supreme Court on Friday Free Speech Coalition v Ken Paxton.

Free speech coalition is a non-commercial that represents employees in the entertainment industry for adults. Paxton, who claimed that the first adjustment rights to protect the right of the age verification law, free combination and privacy rights, claimed Paxton’s Prosecutor General Pakhton.

It noted the possibility of identifying information such as bidders, birthdays and sensitive information, including the information that identifies the information in person, including information. For example, the American Civil Memories Union, “The Law” law of the Law of the Law of the Law of the Law “Solid Anonymity” warned the Law of the Law.

The article for the Conservative Majority, Justice Clarence Thomas, acknowledged that the “burden of the first amendment rights to surrender age.”

However, he said, “There is no first adjustment to prevent the age of age,” he said. Most of the Texas supported the law.

The court confirms that children can withdraw from LGBTQ school material

The Conservative Superature of the Supreme Court also continued his victories of religious beliefs in a decision Mahmoud v Taylor.

This is centralized in the Montgomery County Education Council in Montgomery, where books describing LGBTQ issues in the Montgomery County Education Council.

For example, a text, a young girl was a picture book telling the story of a young girl who gathered the courage to give a girlfriend to a girlfriend. The pride of the header is followed by a child watching a child looking for a lost dog during an annual parade to celebrate the LGBTQ pride.

The parents of children in the school area protested against the religious grounds, and some books were back, as a proud child.

However, the Board will finally refuse to allow parents to allow parents to refuse to refuse and will allow violations to cause violations in the learning environment.

Some educational officials claim that children identifying the LGBTQ material as part of this society and claimed that the LGBTQ people were simply the truth of the people.

In the decision of the majority, Justice Shamuel Alito claimed that the policy of “parents’ religious meetings of the education council” was not adopted.

“The curriculum himself is also an attempt to apply special views on sexuality and sex,” he said.

The court restricts the use of national specialties

Controversial, The biggest decision of the day The Supreme Court decided with the conservative superyrics.

In case Trump V CasaTrump management was applied to the highest court on the use of national specialties all the way.

An executive order was made on the first day of the office for the second term on the beach. This order wanted to reduce the concept of nationality by the fourth of the US Constitution, according to the fourteenth amendment.

Previously, the birth of the right to be born in the US lands: the child would receive the US citizenship, regardless of his parents’ citizenship.

However, Trump rejected the application of citizenship of birth as it was very wide. In the decision of his executive decision, the right of births depending on whether the parents are undocumented or not a restriction of citizenship.

After the release of the executive decision, the legal calls are a precedent who confirmed the nationality of the parent, regardless of the nationality of the parent in the Supreme Court. Federal courts in the states such as Maryland and Washington, gave national specialties to prevent the enforcement decision to effect.

On Friday, the Supreme Court did not have the essence of Trump’s command to his native Native Citizenship. However, this assessed a Trump management application that claims that there are national specialties Examples of court title.

Conservative Superaturity focused on the side with Trump, these actions should not be universal at all, but instead of this must be focused on relief for certain bidders. A possible exception, but will be for the court of class activities.

Amy Coney Barrett, the final appointment of the court and the Trump decided to the majority.

“No one argued that the executor is a debt to obey the law,” he said. “However, the judicial system does not have an indefinite authority to apply this obligation – sometimes the law is that the judiciary prohibits the judiciary.”