Government Watch / Instagram / Politics

The Five Critical Supreme Court Cases Upcoming In 2021

Supreme Court

Amid the chaos currently taking place in Washington, D.C, the U.S. Supreme Court is finally hearing in-person oral arguments for the first time since May of 2020. As of now, the Supreme Court has 27 cases scheduled to be heard by December 8, 2021. Many of the upcoming cases are critical to the future of the United States. From issues of abortion to Second Amendment rights and even school choice, the Supreme Court will hear at least five extremely significant cases in the coming days and months. 

First, the Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in Cameron v. EMW Women’s Surgical Center on October 12, 2021. The monumental case challenges H.B. 454, a Kentucky law from 2018 that banned abortions after 11 weeks of pregnancy, except for occurrences of medical emergencies. The bill also outlawed the performance of all abortions that involve the crushing or dismemberment of unborn babies at any point during pregnancy. The EMW Women’s Surgical Center is attempting to argue that the law violates the Fourteenth Amendment, which is the same argument that was used in the landmark Roe. v. Wade case.

Next, on October 13, 2021, the Supreme Court heard arguments regarding the fate of the infamous Boston Marathon bomber. Specifically, the Supreme Court will ultimately determine whether Dzhokhar Tsarnaev should receive life in prison or be put to death via the death penalty in the United States v. Tsarnaev. Considering that Tsarnaev brutally killed three innocent people and caused 17 others to lose one or more of their limbs in a ruthless terror attack, this will hopefully be an easy decision for the Supreme Court to make. Tsarnaev must receive the death penalty to provide closure to the victims of the tragedy and to send a resounding message to all who seek to carry out similar attacks in America.

On November 3, 2021, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a crucial case for Second Amendment rights. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Corlett, petitioners Robert Nash and Brandon Koch argue that their Second Amendment rights were violated when their applications for a concealed-carry license were denied. The two applications were denied for allegedly failing to comply with a New York law that requires all applicants for a concealed carry license to have “proper cause.” According to a New York court ruling, the proper cause is defined as demonstrating “a special need for self-protection distinguishable from that of the general community.” A decision in support of Nash and Koch could help upend some of the assaults on the Second Amendment coming from New York, as well as other states with extremely restrictive gun-control laws.

In another substantial case about restrictions on abortions, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization on December 1, 2021. The case focuses on H.B. 1510, which is a Mississippi law that banned abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, except in instances of fetal deformity or medical emergencies. H.B. 1510 was signed into law on March 19, 2018, by former Mississippi Governor Phil Bryant and will likely be used by the Supreme Court to determine the future of abortion in America, or ideally, lack thereof. 

Lastly, the Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that relates to school choice on December 8, 2021. The case Carson v. Makin pertains to the state of Maine’s prohibition of schools that have religious instruction from participating in a program where the state pays the private school tuition for students in areas without public schools. The program was intended to promote school choice for those in rural areas but instead does the opposite by failing to support families who choose to send their children to schools with religious instruction. 

A similar case was argued before the Supreme Court in 2020. In Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, the Supreme Court ruled a Montana law that barred families from using school vouchers at schools controlled by churches unconstitutional. To quote Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote the 5-4 opinion, “Montana’s no-aid provision bars religious schools from public benefits solely because of the religious character of the schools. The provision also bars parents who wish to send their children to a religious school from those same benefits, again solely because of the religious character of the school.” A ruling in agreement with Carson would bring Maine one step closer to true school choice, as well as establish a precedent that other states cannot exclude religious schools from their own school choice programs. 

The forthcoming cases will be a major test for the court, given that this is the first full term since Justice Amy Coney Barret took her seat on October 27, 2020, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court. As the constitutional rights of Americans are under attack each day, the Supreme Court has both an opportunity and an obligation to defend the Constitution against said attacks. By making the proper rulings during this term, the Supreme Court can preserve the Second Amendment, allow states to rightfully regulate and restrict abortions within their respective states, and expand both school choice and the rights of religious schools. Optimistically, the justices will have the courage to make the right decisions. 

We hope you've enjoyed this article. While you're here, we have a small favor to ask...

As we prepare for what promises to be a pivotal year for America, we're asking you to consider a gift to help fund our journalism and advocacy.

The need for fact-based reporting that offers real solutions and stops the spread of misinformation has never been greater. Now more than ever, journalism and our first amendment rights are under fire. That's why AMAC is passionately working to increase the number of real news articles we deliver WEEKLY, while continuing to strengthen our presence on Capitol Hill.

AMAC Action, a 501 (C)(4), advocates to protect American values, free speech, the exercise of religion, equality of opportunity, sanctity of life, the rule of law, and love of family.

Thank you for putting your faith in AMAC!

Donate Now

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter
and Download the AMAC News App

Sign Up Today Download

If You Enjoy Articles Like This - Subscribe to the AMAC Daily Newsletter!

Sign Up Today
Read more articles by AMAC, Parker Bono
Notify of
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Marilyn Schmotzer
3 days ago

We will see…we do pray they will make decisions to protect the constitution, the right to life, our school choices

6 days ago

The Supremes are not 6-3 Conservative.
That is a political term fostered on them by the liberal media. They are accurately described “Constitutionalists”; as they do not legislate from their bench and adhere to the meaning of the law.

7 days ago

That’s why we need a convention of states to turn around what this administration is doing and reign in the federal government

Bwa Ha
7 days ago

Personally, I don’t know why Dzhokhar Tsarnaev didn’t get the death penalty back in the day and if so, why it hasn’t been carried out yet. Make it happen!

Mario Capparuccini
7 days ago

I pray that the Lord protects the Supreme Court Justices and their families from violence by Antifa and other communist actors. May God Almighty cause His holy terror to fill the hearts of anyone who would threaten violence against the justices.

Paul Mayercak
8 days ago

I pray the Supreme Court will make right decisions for conservative rights and views as they listen to these upcoming court cases. May the Lord Jesus Christ bless America!!

Bill on the Hill
9 days ago

It’s all for naught… The SCOTUS has failed the American people. Where is the overwhelming evidence provided to them through 1000’s of sworn affidavits on a rigged 2020 US election?
The court system in America is broken.
The legislation system in America is broken.
The school boards are broken.
All ( 3 ) branches of US government is 100% verifiably corrupted…
We as a free people are in that moment now, i.e. REVOLUTION…
It all needs to be scrapped & rebuilt from the ground up & based on the US Constitution.
I have come to the conclusion the military will NOT do this, We The People have to do it, otherwise we will LOSE this nation…The current leader of the insurgents, i.e. JRB’s head is now UNDER water, the American people, political affiliation matters not any longer, utterly DESPISE this man…
In conclusion: F**K Joe Biden and the rest of his cohorts…
Bill on the Hill…

9 days ago

There should be no such thing as “liberal” or “Conservative” judges on the Supreme Court or any other court. There is the law and the Constitution and that’s what they’re here for—to interpret the law and NOT let personal preference in at all. It’s an appalling lack of following the law that’s got the Supreme Court tied up in knots. If the justices can’t do that, they ought to be out on their ear.

JJ Johnson-Smith
9 days ago

The scariest part of this, is that we do NOT have a 6-3, Conservative Majority on the SCOTUS at all! We have a 6-3 MODERATE Majority, and THAT is a serious concern.

Geraldine McGann
9 days ago

The original ROE v WADE decision of 1973 only allowed abortion for any reason in the first tri-mester. I would like it at minimum to be restored to that language.
Don’t forget, in the last century there were no easy and quick do it yourself pregnancy tests and the contraceptive pill and IUD’S only came into use in the 1960’s.
Abortion should be very rare in this century.

Philip Hammersley
9 days ago

AND the “facts” of the case were all FALSE! In any other judicial setting, once the “facts” were shown to be false, the decision would be overturned!

9 days ago

2010 all over again?

J. Farley
10 days ago

Life, Liberty, or Your property is not safe when the Supreme Court Jesters are in session, I am afraid that they will not overturn, Roe vs Wade, and that they will get all touchy-feely and let the little Bomber Tsarnaev off the hook so we can feed him until Allah, takes his sorry butt, that they will screw over the 2nd Amendment in some way.
If we had someone as Chief Justice besides John Roberts, I would feel better because if we on the right win it will be a 5-4 decision, he is the worst mistake that President Bush made,
He will not vote conservatively, has not yet and I don’t believe he will ever, He likes D.C. Social life and the parties.

9 days ago
Reply to  J. Farley

I don’t believe little Bush made a mistake. I think he purposely made the decision to put Roberts in the position of Chief Justice. I don’t believe Bush #1 or #2 were conservative at all, but rather elitist and a huge part of our current problems. Daddy Bush was the first person in my lifetime to ever say the words “New World Order”… neither one of them were ever looking out for our best interest.

9 days ago
Reply to  Steven

Don’t leave out the Bush’s cousin, Bill Clinton. Between the father and son with the cousin, a family dynasty reigned supreme for 20 years over the USA and are responsible for accelerating the destruction of this nation.

9 days ago
Reply to  Steven

You are correct. Both Bushes, especially the elder, were far more concerned with promoting the values of “the global community” and their agenda, than they were ever concerned about American domestic issues. Domestic issues were generally treated as almost an after thought in many instances and that was reflective of how the United States economy kind of just drifted under Bush 1. There was no real emphasis to further the gains made under Reagan. Which shouldn’t be surprising given the elder Bush never really accepted Reagan was right with respect to economics despite the results.

As for G.W.’s selection of john Roberts, I would say Bush simply selected someone who mirrored G.W. Bush’s own personal values. Which of course were not constitutionally conservative by any stretch of the imagination. Yes, Bush may have been religiously conservative, at least to get elected, but that is distinctly different from necessarily also being constitutionally conservative as well. Thus we have a Chief Justice that rules the way he does in so many cases brought before the Court.

J. Farley
9 days ago
Reply to  PaulE

Steven, Max, PaulE, all three of you are right, I was just trying to give the Bush’s the benefit of the doubt, on second thought there is no doubt, they were just as much globalist as the Democrats, but I thought Clinton was Bush 2’s brother by another mother, remember that stupid crap.

J. Farley
9 days ago
Reply to  PaulE

I can’t imagine how crowded that bed in Washinton D.C. must be, because it’s like there are all sleeping in the same bed, makes me wonder how they get any private time with the little women.

9 days ago
Reply to  J. Farley

The little women were in another room/bed with Hillary.

J. Farley
9 days ago
Reply to  Max

Ah………I thought something strange was going on, now I know!!

9 days ago
Reply to  J. Farley

Don’t forget the money

10 days ago

Amac better S-CAN any woke asswipe, any member of cancel culture, and any censorship idiot within the organization.
Real Americans fighting for Real America aren’t taking prisoners. All traitors, all imposters must die. Amac can crap or get of the john roberts! There is no Switzerland in this battle.
You take a firm unyielding stand for The People and Their Constitution or get out!

Richard DeHart
9 days ago
Reply to  Christian

Stop beating around the bush and say what you mean. (BTW I agree with you.)

10 days ago

Trying to predict the outcome of Supreme Court cases is a fool’s errand with Chief Justice John Roberts involved. He is neither a strict constitutionalist, ruling on matters based on the four corners of the Constitution as written, or what many would define as generally conservative. He values preserving his social life in Washington, D.C. far more than ruling correctly on the constitutionality of the case before him. He has proven that point more than once.

Also the nature of some of the cases mentioned are issues that the Court has typically chosen to default to maintaining the status quo of judicial precedent rather than correcting any previous mistakes by the Court. So it will be interesting to see just much any of these Justices are truly strict constitutionalists concerning these cases.

Philip Hammersley
9 days ago
Reply to  PaulE

You are 100% correct, PaulE!

Timothy Womack
10 days ago

Amac, you are awesome!!! Your ever-increasing benefits just keep coming and genuinely challenging that liberal phony aarpuke.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x