The Supreme Court already has made some major decisions during its still fresh 2014-15 term, and all without even putting on their robes.
None of its rulings this month involving high-profile issues like gay marriage, voting rights and abortion were on the docket. Rather, they all were done via court orders that were responding to lower court decisions. And all were issued without explanation.
And while the court often adjudicates by such means, it’s highly unusual for it to issue so many orders on hot-button issues this early in a new term.
Here’s a rundown of what the court has decided so far — all without uttering a word:
Gay marriage
The most sweeping decision of Supreme Court’s new term, which officially began in early October, was in essence a “non-decision,” as it declined to review lower-court rulings that overturned marriage bans in five states. The move allowed same-sex couples in those states to get married, and effectively made gay marriage legal in about 30 states.
The order also cleared the path for states, including Arizona, Idaho and Nevada, to follow suit days later and allow for same-sex unions.
Still, the court order didn’t end the national debate on gay marriage, with activists on each side pressing the justices to formally take up the case this term and give a definitive ruling on the issue. But without knowing the rationale behind the justices’ order, it’s difficult to speculate on how they would rule.
Voting laws
One of the strangest-timed orders in recent memory came at 5 a.m. last Saturday, when the court announced that Texas could use its controversial new voter identification law for the November election.
The order was unsigned and without explanation, as is typical in these situations. And while court orders often don’t include dissents, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg felt moved to pull an all-nighter to issue a pre-dawn rebuttal. She called the law “purposefully discriminatory” and said it amounted to an “unconstitutional poll tax” that risks denying the right to vote to hundreds of thousands of eligible voters.
Liberal-leaning justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined in the dissent. But it’s uncertain where Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court’s quintessential swing voter, or even conservative-leaning Chief Justice John Roberts, who sometimes crosses ideological lines to side with the court’s liberal wing, came down on the issue.
The opinion was a blow to the Justice Department, which had been fighting with Texas to drop the law, which sets out seven forms of approved voter IDs — a list that includes concealed handgun licenses but not college student IDs.
Earlier in the term, the justices also issued rulings that cut early voting by a week in Ohio, let North Carolina end same-day voter registration and blocked Wisconsin from implementing a new voter identification law. In each ruling, the Supreme Court overturned lower court decisions that would have changed voting rules just weeks before the Nov. 4 elections.
Precedent has shown the Supreme Court has a low tolerance for lower courts making changes to voting laws close to an election. But judicial experts expect the court to rule on the constitutionality of the Texas law, if not the others, at a later date.
Abortion
Texas also was the recipient of another key Supreme Court order this month that allowed more than a dozen Texas abortion clinics to reopen, blocking a state law that had imposed strict requirements on abortion providers.
The state would’ve been left with only eight abortion clinics if the law had been allowed to stand, meaning that many women would have to travel more than 150 miles to the nearest abortion provider.
The justices’ order was only five sentences long and gave no explanation of their reasoning.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
