The U.S. Supreme Court is beginning its new term with a docket that includes cases poised to have significant implications for environmental regulation, gun control, and religious liberty. The conservative majority on the court, led by Chief Justice John Roberts, has selectively chosen several high-profile cases that align with longstanding interests of limiting government regulation and expanding individual rights in specific areas.

The term opens with Suncor Energy vs. County Commissioners of Boulder County, a case that could affect the ability of states and local governments to pursue climate change-related litigation against energy companies. Boulder County, Colorado, seeks to hold fossil fuel producers accountable for damages linked to climate change, including costly natural disasters like wildfires and droughts. The county argues that it is not attempting to regulate industry operations but rather to recover costs incurred from climate-related harm. Suncor Energy and other industry groups contend that federal law implicitly preempts such state-level lawsuits and seek to move the case to federal court, where they expect to find a more favorable environment given the court’s conservative majority.

This case arises amid ongoing tensions over federal environmental policy, with the current federal administration expressing skepticism of climate science and the Roberts Court having curtailed the regulatory authority of agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency in prior rulings. The outcome could set a precedent on whether state and local governments can use common law claims to address climate damages, circumventing perceived federal inaction.

Later in the term, the court will review challenges to gun control measures in Connecticut and Cook County, Illinois, focusing on restrictions placed on certain semi-automatic weapons. These firearms, which have a design facilitating rapid firing, fall short of fully automatic status but are associated with mass shootings. Multiple federal appellate courts have upheld such restrictions, even after expansive Supreme Court rulings affirming individual Second Amendment rights. The Roberts Court’s upcoming decision may further delineate the scope of gun regulations permissible under the Constitution.

Another significant case, St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy, involves Colorado’s preschool funding statute, which prohibits discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, and other factors among recipients of state funds. The Catholic school involved argues that this law violates its religious freedom by restricting its ability to set policies on sexual orientation and gender identity. The state counters that the funding is supportive of religious as well as secular institutions and that the law’s anti-discrimination provisions are legitimate measures aligned with public policy.

This dispute reflects broader questions about the balance between religious liberty and anti-discrimination protections, an area where the Roberts Court has recently expanded religious rights, sometimes to the detriment of established civil rights protections. The law firm representing the religious school, Becket, has a record of successful religious liberty cases before the high court and connections to influential conservative legal networks, including associations with Leonard Leo of the Federalist Society. Leo played a key role in vetting and facilitating confirmation of several conservative justices appointed by former President Donald Trump.

The court’s decisions this term may reinforce trends seen in recent rulings curbing federal regulatory power, restricting voting rights protections, limiting affirmative action, and expanding religious exemptions. Observers note that the justices carefully select cases where they anticipate a majority vote, underscoring a strategic approach to shaping American law on issues involving business interests, individual rights, and government authority. The new term’s docket suggests that the conservative majority intends to continue advancing its agenda on several contentious fronts.