Welcome back to my humble newsletter, recapping some highlights from the past week in constitutional law. Please subscribe below to read my weekly Friday posts:
If you cannot, then please do consider sharing this newsletter:
Thanks! Now let’s dive in.

News Desk - This Week’s Top Ten Headlines
Funding for SCOTUS Dries Up Amid Shutdown
The Supreme Court’s Public Information Office announced on Friday that funding for various operations has run out as the federal government’s shutdown continues through a third week. Certain activities, like visiting or touring the court, are suspended until further notice, but the core process of hearing cases will continue. Many lower courts have cut back on staffing, but will still hear cases too.Court Schedules Major Cases for Argument
Despite the shutdown, the Court has scheduled several cases to hear in December, including Trump v. Slaughter, which questions the president’s power to remove heads of independent federal agencies, and National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, on coordinated campaign expenditures and free speech. The court’s December argument calendar includes a total of eight cases spanning six days.Court Hears Cases Over Racial Redistricting, Habeas, and Home Invasions
In oral argument this week, the Court heard several significant cases, one of which made headlines for very strange reasons. Arguments in Case v. Montana and Bowe v. United States deserve attention for the Court’s willingness to reject a probable cause standard for house raids and grappling with habeas issues, the star of the week was Louisiana v. Callais. With majority of the justices seemingly open to striking down parts of the Voting Rights Act, Justice Jackson made an analogy between the law and the Americans with Disabilities Act, saying of black voters “they’re disabled.” Short clips of the phrase spread across social media, often losing the Justice’s point: the Voting Rights Act provides remedies when voting systems block minority participation, just as the ADA remedies barriers to disabled people participating in various social aspects. However, the Fourteenth Amendment does prohibit racial discrimination, and the law may fall regardless of Justice Jackson’s analogy or its context.Chicago: Court Rules ICE Must Wear Body Cameras
A federal judge in Chicago extended a temporary order for ICE to wear body cameras until November 6, due to doubts about ICE’s compliance with the original order. This also prohibits ICE from using riot control weapons like tear gas and rubber bullets against protesters or journalists unless necessary to prevent harm. It requires two warnings and probable cause for actions against journalists. The order comes in a class action lawsuit filed earlier this month that alleges a “pattern of extreme brutality” from ICE officers.Portland: Block on National Guard Troops Extended
Two thousand miles from Chicago, a judge in Portland extended a temporary block on federally deployed National Guard troops entering the city until October 29, when a bench trial will decide if a longer block is warranted. Judge Karin Immergut ruled that President Trump lacked authority to federalize National Guard troops, as Portland’s protests did not constitute a foreign invasion or rebellion justifying such deployment.Judge Rules Trump Admin Violated Court Order
On Tuesday, a federal judge in Rhode Island ruled that the Trump administration violated a September court order by issuing FEMA grant award letters to states nearly identical to those struck down as imposing unlawful conditions requiring cooperation with federal immigration enforcement in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The new order described the letters’ conditional language as a “ham-handed attempt to bully the states,” ordering DHS to amend them within a week. This is the latest from a lawsuit by states challenging the conditions of an executive order targeting “sanctuary jurisdictions.”States Sue Over Energy Grants “Boondoggle”
A group of 24 states filed a lawsuit on Friday against the Trump administration for canceling the Solar for All grant program, a Biden administration creation. The complaint alleges that the EPA breached binding grant agreements by unilaterally terminating funds without evidence and violated their duties of good faith and fair dealing. A companion suit in the Western District of Washington claims the cancellation was arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act, claiming the move increased energy costs, emissions, and lost jobs. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin defended it as ending a “boondoggle.”Judge Bove Uses First Opinion to Defend Executive Power
In his first public opinion following his recent appointment to the Third Circuit, Judge Emil Bove wrote a concurrence criticizing the initial administrative stay as an unwarranted intrusion on executive immigration authority. He argued Ramos waived his rights under the Visa Waiver Program, lacked a viable due process or Suspension Clause claim, and failed to show irreparable harm or likelihood of success on the merits. The court transferred Ramos’ petition for review of the order to the Fifth Circuit, deeming it the proper venue as proceedings concluded there. The court also denied Ramos’ emergency motion for a stay of removal.Lawsuit Filed Over Immigration Consequences for Free Speech
Three major U.S. labor unions filed suit on Thursday against the Trump administration, alleging that its use of AI to monitor visa holders’ social media for criticism of the government, the administration, or Israel violates the First Amendment. In the complaint, the unions claim the administration’s broad immigration crackdown has chilled free speech among thousands of union members by threatening deportation, visa revocations, and other legal action. The lawsuit cites cases like Mahmoud Khalil’s to argue that the administration’s policies equate criticism of U.S.-Israel relations with support for terrorism.Supreme Court Denies Alex Jones Appeal
The Court declined to hear Alex Jones’ appeal of a $1.4 billion defamation judgment over his claims that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax. In his appeal, Jones argued the judgments violated his First Amendment rights by misrepresenting his statements and ignoring their context, but the Court did not explain its denial and also rejected his emergency request to pause enforcement, which he claimed may allow The Onion to seize Infowars. The case joins Ghislaine Maxwell’s petition in the Court’s high profile denials so far this term.

Picks of the Week - Articles Worth Your Time
A year after Loper Bright
Source: SCOTUSBlog | Author: Abbe Gluck | Link
Happy one-year anniversary to the case that brought down Chevron.
The Trouble With Dignity
Source: Expression | Author: Lasky & Ramkissoon | Link
An interesting examination of the response to Charlie Kirk’s death through the lens of free speech and the First Amendment.
Fire the Teachers that Celebrated Charlie Kirk’s Assassination
Source: Defense of Freedom Institute | Author: Angela Morabito | Link
An appropriate counterpoint to the last article.
Papers and Research - Serious Scholarly Selections
Reconciling the Unitary Executive and the Opinions Clause, by Michael Rappaport
A brief argument touching on my last article. Read it here.
Loper Bright as Evidence of Unlawful Regulations, by Eli Nachmany
Fantastic piece on the broader implications of Loper. Check it out here.
That’s a wrap! Thank you for reading. Like and share below, and I’ll see you this Friday!
In liberty,
Ethan Savka