Supreme Court to Hear Key Cases on Immigration, Religious Zoning, and Military Benefits

The United States Supreme Court has announced its decision to hear arguments early next year in two cases that could have significant implications for immigration policy and religious zoning laws. This development was disclosed as the court released a list of orders following its recent conference, marking a return to full sessions after the summer recess.

The first case on the docket is Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha, which scrutinizes the Trump administration’s policy regarding the detention of undocumented immigrants. The policy in question permits the detention of noncitizens apprehended within U.S. borders without a bond hearing, until their deportation proceedings are resolved. This approach has been contentious and has led to more than 9,300 adverse rulings from federal district judges, as analyzed by Politico. The Supreme Court’s decision to review this case comes as federal appeals courts are split over the legality of these detention guidelines.

Simultaneously, the court will also address a case involving the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) in Missionaries of St. John the Baptist v. Frederic. This case arose from a dispute over a zoning ordinance in northern Kentucky, where the Missionaries of Saint John the Baptist sought to construct a religious shrine. While the local zoning board approved the project, neighbors raised concerns about potential disruptions, leading to an appeal that was supported by a state intermediate court. The religious group contends that denying their permit would infringe on their rights under RLUIPA, which seeks to prevent undue burdens on religious exercise.

Finally, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear Marschner v. Marschner, a case dealing with the allocation of military benefits in divorce settlements under the Uniformed Services Former Spouses’ Protection Act. This issue has been contentious in light of the court’s earlier decision in Howell v. Howell, which addressed compensation when retirement pay is waived for disability benefits. SCOTUSblog provides detailed coverage of these pivotal cases.