Supreme Court’s 6–3 Rulings ROCK America

The Supreme Court’s 2024–2025 term is end­ing with piv­otal 6–3 rul­ings, rein­forc­ing its con­ser­v­a­tive stance post-Dobbs. South Carolina’s win to block Planned Par­ent­hood from Med­ic­aid fund­ing sets a prece­dent for states to lim­it tax­pay­er sup­port for abor­tion providers. More rul­ings to come on Trump’s birthright cit­i­zen­ship exec­u­tive order, deemed like­ly uncon­sti­tu­tion­al. Maryland’s push to allow par­ents to opt out of LGBTQ books in schools gains trac­tion, along­side Georgia’s efforts to remove such mate­ri­als. The Court also set out to tack­le con­ser­v­a­tive chal­lenges to Obamacare’s pre­ven­tive care man­dates and an $8B inter­net sub­sidy pro­gram, like­ly uphold­ing the lat­ter. Racial ger­ry­man­der­ing cas­es in Louisiana could reshape con­gres­sion­al maps, impact­ing Black vot­ing pow­er and the 2026 midterms. Explore how these deci­sions could shift health­care, edu­ca­tion, and vot­ing rights nation­wide.

• Today the Supreme Court ends their ses­sion with 6–3 rul­ings. This is a good court. This is the same court that gave us the Dobbs deci­sion. Yes­ter­day was a good day, that states can stop the Med­ic­aid fund­ing for Planned Par­ent­hood. South Car­oli­na led the way that if you are a Med­ic­aid recip­i­ent that Planned Par­ent­hood is not a med­ical provider. 
• Birthright cit­i­zen­ship: Trump’s exec­u­tive order lim­it­ing birthright cit­i­zen­ship has been put on hold by judges across the coun­try who ruled it’s prob­a­bly uncon­sti­tu­tion­al. 
• Pre­vent­ing Stu­dents from read­ing LGBTQ books and minors from view­ing porn. Thank you Mary­land for want­i­ng to stop chil­dren from read­ing LGBTQ books. In Geor­gia there is a group that has been work­ing for years to stop and get this mate­r­i­al out of school libraries. This will be big if this will allow us to get it out of our schools. 
• The court will rule on con­ser­v­a­tive chal­lenges to Oba­macare and inter­net sub­si­dies. The court is con­sid­er­ing con­ser­v­a­tive chal­lenges to Oba­macare and to an $8B fed­er­al pro­gram that sub­si­dizes high-speed inter­net and phone ser­vice for mil­lions of Amer­i­cans. The jus­tices seemed like­ly to reject an argu­ment that the telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions pro­gram is fund­ed by an uncon­sti­tu­tion­al tax, a case that raised ques­tions about how much Con­gress can “del­e­gate” its leg­isla­tive author­i­ty to a fed­er­al agency. Two Chris­t­ian-owned busi­ness­es and some peo­ple in Texas argue that the vol­un­teer group of experts that rec­om­mend­ed the ser­vices health insur­ance must cov­er is so pow­er­ful that, under the Con­sti­tu­tion, its mem­bers must be appoint­ed by the pres­i­dent and con­firmed by the Sen­ate. 
• Racial ger­ry­man­der­ing ver­sus Black vot­ing pow­er. A chal­lenge to the LA con­gres­sion­al map by non-Black vot­ers tests the bal­anc­ing act states must strike, com­ply­ing with a civ­il rights law that pro­tects the vot­ing pow­er of a racial minor­i­ty while not dis­crim­i­nat­ing against oth­er vot­ers. The out­come will also deter­mine if the state can keep a map that gave Democ­rats an advan­tage in the dis­put­ed dis­trict, a deci­sion that could make a dif­fer­ence in what could be a close bat­tle for con­trol of the House in 2026 midterms. 
• In Geor­gia you think your con­gres­sion­al lines are set­tled but they are in appeal right now, and when this hap­pens at the end of the day this could have a major impact on the lines. In Geor­gia what they have done is divide the black vote and put it into the repub­li­can blocks, and that is what they are look­ing at that they are not prop­er­ly giv­en the vot­ing pow­er for the racial minor­i­ty. The out­come will also deter­mine if the state can keep a map that gave Democ­rats an advan­tage in the dis­put­ed dis­trict, a deci­sion that could make a dif­fer­ence in what could be a close bat­tle for con­trol of the House in 2026 midterms.