Episode Details
Back to EpisodesNew Opinions: June 25th | Four Rulings, One Day: Guns, Borders, Refugees, and Roundup
Season 2025
Episode 104
Published 5 days, 8 hours ago
Description
Overview:
- Four opinions released June 25th, 2026 — one day, across environmental tort preemption, immigration enforcement, executive authority over humanitarian protections, and Second Amendment rights.
- Three of four decisions split 6–3: identical conservative majority, identical liberal dissent, three consecutive times.
- The fourth — a Roundup cancer lawsuit and a $1 million-plus Missouri jury verdict — fractured the usual alliances, drawing Sotomayor and Kagan into a 7–2 conservative coalition while pushing Gorsuch into dissent alongside Jackson.
- Justice Alito authored three majority opinions; Justice Kavanaugh authored one; Chief Justice Roberts joined all four without writing separately.
- Justice Thomas wrote or joined a separate concurrence in all four cases — each one planting seeds for future constitutional challenges to the administrative state, executive immigration power, and federal equal protection doctrine.
- Justice Jackson dissented in all four cases — twice as the author — making her the most prolific dissenter of the opinion day.
- This episode breaks down all four decisions: authors, vote splits, key holdings, Thomas's concurrence roadmap, and real-world consequences.
Monsanto Co. versus Durnell | No. 24–1068
- Federal preemption law (FIFRA) blocks state failure-to-warn tort claims requiring cancer warnings on Roundup's label beyond what the EPA approved.
- 7–2. Justice Kavanaugh authored the majority, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Barrett.
- Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion flagging three structural concerns: FIFRA likely exceeds Congress's Commerce Clause authority; EPA's labeling power raises non-delegation problems; and agency regulations may lack Supremacy Clause status to preempt state law.
- Justice Jackson dissented, joined by Gorsuch.
- Missouri Court of Appeals reversed and remanded.
Mullin, Secretary of Homeland Security, et al. versus Al Otro Lado et al. | No. 25–5
- An alien standing in Mexico does not "arrive in the United States" within the meaning of the INA; inspection and asylum obligations don't attach before physical border crossing.
- 6–3. Justice Alito authored the majority, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett.
- Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion arguing lower courts evaded §1252(f)(1)'s classwide injunction bar through declaratory-relief labeling, and that statutes compelling the President to admit aliens would infringe inherent executive exclusion authority.
- Justice Sotomayor dissented, joined by Kagan and Jackson.
- Justice Jackson filed a separate dissenting opinion.
- Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded.
Mullin, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, et al. versus Doe et al. | Nos. 25–1083 & 25–1084
- The TPS statute bars judicial review of termination decisions; the equal protection race claim challenging Haiti's TPS termination unlikely to succeed on the merits.
- Justice Alito announced the judgment and delivered the Court's opinion, joined in full by Roberts, Thomas, and Kavanaugh, and except for Part III–A by Gorsuch and Barrett.
- Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion arguing §1254a(b)(5)(A) bars even constitutional claims, that Bolling v. Sharpe (1954) deserves overruling, and that non-citizen immigrants hold no constitutional equal protection rights against federal immigration decisions.
- Justice Kagan dissented, joined by Sotomayor and Jackson.
- Second and D.C. Circuits reversed and remanded.
Wolford et al. versus Lopez, Attorney General of Hawaii | No. 24–1046
- Hawaii's law prohibiting licensed carry-permit holders from carrying firearms on private property open to the public w