Court announces cases it will hear in October, which include significant disputes on climate change and immigration detention

The Supreme Court will kick off its 2026-27 term with oral arguments in a lawsuit brought by a Colorado county seeking millions of dollars from oil and gas companies for their alleged role in exacerbating climate change. The calendar for the justices’ October argument session, released on Tuesday afternoon, indicates that Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) v. Commissioners of Boulder County will be the first case argued on Monday, Oct. 5 – the first Monday in October and the official start of the court’s new term.

The justices will hear arguments in seven cases over five days in October. Other noteworthy cases during the October argument session include Genalo v. Black, in which the court will consider whether there is a point at which a noncitizen has been detained so long that he has a constitutional right to a bond hearing and, if so, what standard the government must meet for him to remain in detention; and Salazar v. Paramount Global, a digital privacy case involving the interpretation of a federal law enacted in 1988 after a store provided a list of the movies rented by Judge Robert Bork, an unsuccessful nominee to the Supreme Court, to a Washington reporter.

The October argument schedule

Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) v. Commissioners of Boulder County (Oct. 5) – Whether federal law bars claims under state law seeking relief for injuries allegedly caused by the effects of interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions on the global climate; and whether the Supreme Court has the authority to hear this case.

Johnson v. United States Congress (Oct. 5) – Whether federal district courts have the authority to hear challenges to the constitutionality of federal laws affecting veterans’ benefits.

Anderson v. Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee (Oct. 6) – A case involving the standards for pleading a claim, based on the underperformance of a fund, that a fiduciary has violated the duty of prudence required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

Department of the Air Force v. Prutehi Guahan (Oct. 7) – Whether an environmental group can challenge the Air Force’s application to renew its permit to dispose of unexploded ordinance before Guam’s EPA had acted on the application; and whether the Air Force was required to submit an environmental impact statement before submitting its application.

Beaird v. United States (Oct. 13) – Whether a 1993 case on how courts should deal with commentary to the Sentencing Guidelines is still good law.

Genalo v. Black (Oct. 13) – Whether there is a point at which a noncitizen’s detention becomes “unreasonably prolonged,” so that he has a constitutional right to a bond hearing; whether, at such a hearing, a “clear and convincing evidence” standard applies; and whether this case is moot (that is, no longer a live controversy) because the noncitizen was released from custody in 2022.

Salazar v. Paramount Global (Oct. 14) – Whether the phrase “goods or services from a video tape service provider,” as used in the Video Privacy Protection Act's definition of “consumer,” refers to all of a video tape service provider’s goods or services or only to its audiovisual goods or services.