⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The full Tenth Circuit considers how far Colorado's opt-out from a federal banking law lets it enforce state interest-rate caps. A federal district court blocked Colorado from applying those caps to certain loans by out-of-state, state-chartered banks. A divided Tenth Circuit panel reversed, but the full court vacated that decision for rehearing. Colorado says the law covers a loan to a Colorado borrower even when the bank is elsewhere. Three banking trade groups say the loan is made where the bank is located, so Colorado's opt-out cannot reach their members' out-of-state banks.

National Association of Industrial Bankers v. Weiser (No. 24-1293) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued August 18, 2026.

The Tenth Circuit reconsiders whether Agnes Mukantagara and her son, Ebenezer Shyaka, may obtain court review of a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services finding that they were not refugees when admitted. The agency based that finding on its conclusion that Mukantagara had participated in the Rwandan genocide; she denies it. A January panel decision allowed their suit to proceed, but the court vacated that decision after the Supreme Court decided Mullin v. Doe. The panel will now consider whether review is barred and whether another route remains.

Mukantagara, et al. v. Mullin, et al. (No. 24-4071) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued August 17, 2026.

The full Tenth Circuit hears United States versus Ruiz and United States versus Hebert together. Separate juries convicted Joel Ruiz and Dennis Hebert of federal sexual-abuse offenses in Indian country. Separate appellate panels later held that prosecutors had not proved either defendant was a non-Indian, as circuit precedent required. The full court vacated those judgments. It will reconsider whether non-Indian status is an element the government must prove or an affirmative defense the defendant must raise, who bears the ultimate burden, and whether the cases may be retried if the rule changes.

United States v. Ruiz and United States v. Hebert (No. 24-2128 & 24-7030) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, argued August 17, 2026.

The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims reviews a proposed class settlement in Freund v. Collins. The case concerns files automatically closed in the Veterans Appeals Control and Locator System, or VACOLS, because the system treated them as missing a timely substantive appeal—the filing used to carry an old-system benefits dispute to the Board of Veterans' Appeals. The class covers files closed from December 12, 1990, through February 6, 2025, and still closed. Under the proposal, VA would manually review 28,258 files flagged as likely to contain timely appeals, reactivate qualifying appeals, and let other class members request review. Up to 64,599 additional files would receive individual notice. The court will decide whether the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate.

Mark Freund, et al. v. Douglas A. Collins (No. 21-4168) — United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, argued August 13, 2026.

The Supreme Court considers whether Exxon can sue Cuban state-owned companies over oil assets Cuba confiscated in 1960. The Helms-Burton Act lets a United States claimant sue for trafficking in confiscated property, a term that includes knowingly using or benefiting from it. The Act defines a person to include a foreign state's agencies and instrumentalities. Sovereign immunity ordinarily shields those entities from lawsuits. Abrogating that immunity means Congress removes it by statute. Exxon says Helms-Burton does that on its own. The Cuban companies say Exxon must also satisfy an exception in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. The D.C. Circuit agreed with the companies. The Supreme Court later reversed, six to three, holding that Helms-Burton itself removes the immunity of Cuban agencies and instrumentalities.

Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Corporación Cimex, S.A. (No. 24-699) — Supreme Court of the United States, argued February 23, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit hears Carla Jackson and Teldrin Foster's appeals from jury convictions arising from a Paycheck Protection Program fraud case. Foster was convicted on fraud, conspiracy, false-statement, and money-laundering counts involving fourteen loan applications. Jackson was convicted on two money-laundering counts. Jackson will challenge whether the government proved she knew the funds came from crime or intended to conceal their source. Foster will challenge the trial court's decision allowing co-defendant Ricky Dixon, who had pleaded guilty and been sentenced, to invoke the Fifth Amendment instead of testifying. The United States will ask the court to affirm.

United States v. Carla Jackson and Teldrin Foster (No. 24-11785) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 14, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit hears Grant Napear's appeal from summary judgment for Bonneville International. Napear hosted a daily KHTK sports show and announced Sacramento Kings games. After former Kings player DeMarcus Cousins asked his view of Black Lives Matter, Napear replied, ‘All lives matter, every single one.’ Bonneville fired him two days later. Napear invokes California laws protecting employees' political activity. The district court held that applying those laws here would violate Bonneville's First Amendment right to choose its on-air voice. The panel asks whether it can reach that constitutional issue without first deciding whether the state laws cover the firing.

Napear v. Bonneville International Corporation (No. 25-2818) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 14, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit considers whether TECO Energy had to warn retirement-plan participants that rising interest rates could sharply reduce pension lump sums. Alejandro Roche worked for TECO for about thirty-three years. He planned to retire in December 2022, but the plan's ninety-day notice rule moved his payment into January, cutting his estimate from about four hundred eighty-three thousand dollars to about three hundred ninety-seven thousand. Roche says ERISA, the federal law governing employee benefit plans, imposed duties of loyalty and care that required a warning. TECO says it followed the law's specific disclosure rules and had no duty to offer unsolicited financial advice. The district court dismissed Roche's proposed class action with prejudice.

Alejandro Roche, Appellant v. TECO Energy, Inc., et al. (No. 25-12050) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 14, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit hears the Estate of Lacy Lloyd Thomas's civil-rights appeal against Clark County and former prosecutor Scott Mitchell. Thomas's criminal trial ended in a mistrial after records favorable to the defense surfaced. The Nevada Supreme Court later found that prosecutors intentionally withheld those records and barred another trial. In the federal suit that followed, one judge dismissed the claim against Mitchell on absolute-immunity grounds, and another entered summary judgment for the county on a failure-to-train claim. The estate asks to revive both claims. Mitchell and Clark County say the challenged acts were protected advocacy and the county had no warning that more training was needed.

Estate of Lacy Lloyd Thomas, et al. v. Clark County Nevada, et al. (No. 25-3382) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 14, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit reviews a Tax Court decision about a conservation easement over 622 acres in Liberty County, Georgia. Seabrook claimed a $32.6 million charitable deduction. The Tax Court valued the easement at $4.718 million and applied a 40 percent gross-valuation-misstatement penalty. Seabrook challenges the court's comparable-sales analysis and says the IRS did not prove meaningful supervisory approval of the penalty. The Commissioner asks the court to affirm.

Seabrook Property, LLC, Appellant v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (No. 25-12126) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 14, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit hears Alaska's appeal over whether the Interior Secretary may take land into trust for Alaska tribes after the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. The Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes owns a 787-square-foot parcel in Juneau and asked Interior to take it into trust. The district court vacated Interior's approval and sent the application back for further proceedings, but rejected Alaska's argument that the 1971 law ended the Secretary's authority. Alaska asks the court to review that ruling now. Interior and the Tribe say the remand makes the appeal premature.

State of Alaska v. Newland, et al. (No. 24-5280 & 24-5285) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit considers whether an earlier trademark case bars David Semas and Metalast from suing Chemeon's distributors over their later use of the phrase formerly Metalast. The Nevada district court dismissed the suit under claim preclusion. The appellants say the distributors were not parties to the first case and that later conduct created new claims. The distributors answer that the cases concern the same conduct and closely aligned parties.

Semas, et al. v. Chemetall US, Inc., et al. (No. 24-6584) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit revisits a fight over the Bureau of Reclamation's plan to partially line the Truckee Canal. The National Environmental Policy Act requires a federal agency to study and disclose major environmental effects, alternatives, and mitigation, but it does not force the agency to choose a particular result. Fernley and two well owners say the lining will reduce seepage that recharges the area's aquifer and that the review was inadequate. The federal defendants say Reclamation considered the choices reasonably and that courts owe its scientific judgments substantial deference.

City of Fernley v. Conant (No. 25-1776) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit considers whether Section 230 shields Meta from claims brought by a woman who says a trafficker used Instagram to groom and sell her. The district court dismissed her civil sex-trafficking and product-liability claims. She argues that her case targets Instagram's reporting tools, warnings, identity checks, and other product design choices, not Meta's handling of users' posts. Meta says those theories still seek to hold it liable for third-party content and are barred by circuit precedent.

Doe v. Facebook (No. 25-2246) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit considers whether Shared Partnership waited too long to sue Meta over Facebook advertising policies. Shared says Meta promised useful reasons when ads were rejected but knowingly could not deliver them, and that each later ad purchase created a timely claim. Meta says Shared suspected the alleged problem years before suing, kept buying ads anyway, and cannot revive claims based on Facebook's removal of its pages.

Shared Partnership v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (No. 25-2612) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit reviews EPA's 2026 Pesticide General Permit, which covers certain pesticide discharges where EPA is the permitting authority. The Center for Biological Diversity challenges the permit, arguing that EPA let most covered operators avoid notices and annual reports and chose visual monitoring that may miss delayed harm. EPA says it reasonably limited reporting to larger dischargers, weighed the burden of collecting more information, and added water-quality safeguards to pesticide-label requirements.

Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA (No. 25-2738) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit reviews Charlie Washington's federal habeas challenge to his Alabama death sentence. Washington says his trial lawyers failed to investigate and present available mitigation before the jury recommended death by a ten-to-two vote. Alabama says the omitted evidence was weak or damaging and the sentencing judge later said it would not have changed the sentence. The court also considers Washington's claim that AEDPA deference to state-court rulings violates Article Three after Loper Bright; Alabama and the United States defend the statute.

Washington v. Commissioner, Alabama Department of Corrections (No. 24-13905) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit considers three consolidated challenges to the Environmental Protection Agency's 2024 new-chemicals rule. Alaska Community Action on Toxics and Environmental Defense Fund say persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic chemicals—which resist breakdown and build up in living things—should not qualify for faster exemptions based on low volume or low exposure. The United Auto Workers says the agency ignored its proposal for confidential worker access to new-chemical information. The agency says it reviews exemptions individually, requires written approval before manufacture, and the union's proposal was outside this rulemaking.

Alaska Community Action on Toxics v. EPA (No. 25-158) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit hears Thomas Addaquay's consolidated appeals from convictions in two fraud cases and a combined sentence of one hundred fifty months. The discussion centers on the stolen-identity tax-refund case, where a jury convicted him of twenty-nine fraud-related counts. The argument concerns that verdict and the loss calculation used at sentencing.

United States v. Thomas Addaquay, Appellant (No. 25-10609 & 25-10611) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit hears Ryan Bradshaw's appeal from the dismissal of his damages suit against two Alaska corrections commissioners. When he was sentenced, Alaska gave probationers thirty days of credit for every thirty compliant days. A later law barred people convicted of felony assault from earning those credits. Bradshaw says applying that change to him extended his probation by eighteen months and violated the Ex Post Facto Clause, which bars retroactive increases in punishment. The district court dismissed the claim, finding that prior decisions had not clearly established the change as unconstitutional, and therefore gave the commissioners qualified immunity from damages. Bradshaw will rely on Supreme Court prison-credit cases; the commissioners will say those cases did not concern probation.

Bradshaw v. Dahlstrom (No. 25-4165) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit hears an early appeal by Gwinnett County police officers in Kirk Fields's civil-rights case. Fields alleges that officers falsely arrested him during two encounters and abandoned or destroyed his belongings. The district court let several false-arrest and property claims continue. The officers will seek qualified immunity, which can shield officials from damages unless they violated clearly established federal law. They will ask the court to reject parts of Fields's account based on body-camera recordings; Fields will answer that the court must accept allegations the recordings do not clearly contradict. Before reaching the merits, the panel must decide which issues it may review before final judgment.

Fields v. Howse (No. 25-11639) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit reviews a medical-malpractice judgment from Alaska. Alexa Raposo and Zachary Thornton sued the United States after their minor child was injured during delivery. The district court found a government doctor reckless and awarded damages. The appeal concerns that recklessness finding and how the court calculated damages.

Raposo v. United States (No. 25-4752) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit reviews the value of a conservation easement donated by J.L. Minerals. The easement permanently limits the land's use while J.L. Minerals keeps ownership, and its lost value may qualify for a charitable deduction. The Tax Court sharply reduced the claimed deduction and imposed a 40 percent valuation penalty after rejecting kaolin mining as the property's likely near-term use. The appeal asks whether the Tax Court ignored material evidence and used the wrong valuation method.

J.L. Minerals v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (No. 25-11085) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit hears Matthew Nason's appeal from his conviction and ten-year sentence for assaulting a federal officer with a dangerous weapon. A jury found that he fired a handgun toward a deputy U.S. marshal who was serving arrest warrants at Nason's Reno home. The argument asks whether the jury instructions went beyond the indictment and whether the sentencing judge adequately supported the aggravated-assault guideline.

United States v. Nason (No. 25-1655) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit considers Andrew Filipowski's challenge to the IRS's rejection of his one point five million dollar offer to settle a tax debt exceeding one hundred twenty-seven million dollars. The agency estimated he could pay nearly six million dollars and also rejected the offer on public-policy grounds. Filipowski says factual errors and disputed evidence made summary judgment improper; the Commissioner says the rejection was reasonable.

Andrew Filipowski v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (No. 25-11382) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

Kimeka Simmons and her children appeal a jury verdict for their former landlords. Simmons requested permission for an emotional-support animal, and the landlords later declined to renew her lease. The appeal asks whether two jury instructions wrongly used the landlords' subjective belief instead of what a reasonable landlord knew, and whether an instruction improperly invoked an interactive process the Fair Housing Act does not require.

Simmons v. Bauer Rentals (No. 25-2238) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit hears Jose Antonio Brown's appeal in a federal case arising from four armed-store robberies in Tuscaloosa County.

United States v. Jose Brown (No. 23-10653) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

Kelly Usanovic asks the Ninth Circuit to revive a Telephone Consumer Protection Act case over calls to her cell phone on the National Do Not Call Registry. The district court dismissed her complaint for failing to plausibly connect the callers to Americana. The appeal concerns agency liability and whether the statute covers cell phones.

Usanovic v. Americana, LLC (No. 25-2263) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

Beaverdam Creek Holdings challenges the Tax Court's valuation of a conservation easement on granite-bearing land in Georgia. A conservation easement permanently restricts land use. The court accepted quarrying as the land's highest and best use: the reasonably probable, most valuable use. But it rejected Beaverdam's discounted cash flow model and relied on comparable sales. The issue is whether that was error.

Beaverdam Creek Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (No. 25-12624) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

Western Watersheds Project and the Center for Biological Diversity ask the Ninth Circuit to reverse a ruling that upheld the Bureau of Land Management's vegetation plan for Nevada's South Spring and Hamlin Valleys. The groups say the environmental assessment is too vague about which treatments will occur where and when. Interior says the plan identifies preferred treatments and preserves flexibility as conditions change. The court must decide whether the plan complies with the National Environmental Policy Act and federal land-management law in light of the Supreme Court's Seven County decision.

Western Watersheds Project, et al. v. U.S. Department of the Interior, et al. (No. 25-2985) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

Ranch Springs asks the Eleventh Circuit to overturn a Tax Court ruling that valued a conservation easement on one hundred ten acres of Alabama farmland at three hundred thirty-five thousand five hundred dollars and imposed a forty-percent valuation penalty. A conservation easement restricts future land use; its value generally is the property's value before the restriction minus its value after. Ranch Springs says the land's highest and best use—the reasonably probable use producing its greatest value—was a limestone quarry, and uncertainty belonged in the valuation. The Commissioner says a quarry was speculative and nearby land sales showed a much lower value.

Ranch Springs, LLC v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue (No. 25-12753) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

Charles Eubanks asks the Ninth Circuit to reverse the denial of four claims in his federal habeas case challenging Nevada murder, attempted-murder, and attempted-robbery convictions. Federal habeas lets a state prisoner challenge custody that violates federal law. Eubanks says prosecutors withheld evidence that could impeach jailhouse witnesses and his lawyers mishandled plea offers, accomplice liability, and sentencing. Under Brady, prosecutors must disclose favorable evidence when its suppression could affect the result. Nevada says the witnesses were already heavily impeached, the remaining evidence was strong, and Eubanks cannot overcome procedural bars or show prejudice.

Charles Eubanks v. Jeremy Bean, et al. (No. 25-973) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 13, 2026.

Colleen McGuigan asks the Eleventh Circuit to revive federal civil racketeering, or RICO, and Florida claims against her brother Thomas Murray and two companies. She says a forged nineteen eighty-eight stock option induced her to give up shares in their family business in two thousand six. A Delaware court later barred related claims under laches, an equitable rule against harmful delay, and the federal district court dismissed this suit. McGuigan says that timeliness ruling did not decide who forged the option. The appellees say Delaware already resolved the facts needed here and that the new claims are also late.

Colleen McGuigan v. Thomas Murray, et al. (No. 25-11698) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

Three Border Patrol agents ask the Ninth Circuit to dismiss a Fourth Amendment excessive-force claim arising from the fatal shooting of Raymond Mattia outside his home on the Tohono O'odham Nation. The district court allowed the claim to proceed. In this pretrial appeal, the panel first must decide whether it can review a dispute over what body-camera footage shows. The agents say the footage contradicts the complaint, entitles them to qualified immunity, and that Bivens does not extend to this setting. Mattia's estate and family say the edited footage cannot resolve disputed facts and that the claim fits the Fourth Amendment context Bivens already recognized.

Mattia, et al. v. Whitehouse, et al. (No. 25-6118) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Eleventh Circuit reviews a permanent injunction requiring Florida to improve notices that terminate Medicaid for financial ineligibility. After a class-action trial, the district court found the notices confusing and too vague for recipients to tell why they had lost coverage. Florida says due process requires only the action, effective date, and general reason because recipients can get details through its call center and hearing process. It also says the district court decided notice-structure issues outside the certified class claims. The plaintiffs say the notices must identify the income, household size, eligibility category, and income limit Florida used, so recipients can decide whether to seek a hearing.

Chianne D. v. Florida Medicaid Officials (No. 26-10419) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The Ninth Circuit considers whether a bankruptcy court could bar two Chapter 13 debtors from filing again for one year after they asked to dismiss their cases. The debtors say Section 1307(b) made dismissal mandatory and Section 109(g) limits any refiling bar to 180 days. Milestone Financial says Section 349(a) permits a longer bar for cause. It also says the appeal is moot because the one-year bar has expired.

Srinivasan v. Milestone Financial, LLC (No. 26-577) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, argued August 12, 2026.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces considers what a commander may send to court-martial after a Special Trial Counsel defers a reported offense. The Special Trial Counsel treated allegations against Marine Corporal Thomas Kruse as covered domestic violence, then deferred them because the evidence did not meet its prosecution standard. A military judge later dismissed assault charges based on the same alleged conduct, but the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals reinstated them. Kruse says Article 24a keeps the underlying conduct within the Special Trial Counsel's exclusive authority. The United States says it restricts only offenses Congress expressly lists as covered.

United States v. Thomas E. Kruse (No. 26-0156/MC) — United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, argued May 19, 2026.

The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims considers which benefits claims were before the Board in Jacqueline Roberson's appeal for her late husband. He sought compensation under Section 1151 for a heart condition and pressure ulcers after VA treatment, and a total disability rating based on individual unemployability, or TDIU. Section 1151 can compensate certain additional disabilities caused by VA care as if service connected. TDIU can pay at the total-disability rate when service-connected disabilities prevent substantially gainful work. Roberson will argue that medical evidence linking the heart and ulcer conditions to cocaine use associated with his PTSD brought secondary service connection into the claims. Secondary service connection covers a condition caused or aggravated by an already service-connected disability. She will also argue that an unresolved 2004 PTSD appeal affects the TDIU period. The Secretary will contend that Section 1151 and service-connection claims are separate, while agreeing that the Board must reconsider TDIU from February 1, 2011.

Jacqueline Roberson v. Douglas A. Collins (No. 24-5809) — United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, argued July 16, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit considers whether federal law may constitutionally disarm Raymond Andrew Luna based on a prior simple drug-possession felony. The district judge dismissed his felon-in-possession indictment on Second Amendment grounds, and the government appeals. Recent circuit cases distinguish simple possession from drug trafficking. The government says records from Luna's prior case show trafficking activity and also notes that he was under a separate firearm indictment when he possessed this gun. Luna says the court may consider only the offense of conviction, not disputed underlying conduct, and that the separate statute for people under indictment addresses receiving or transferring a firearm, not mere possession.

United States v. Luna (No. 25-40272) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 4, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit considers whether two Harris County officers can be sued for failing to stop a police dog's prolonged bite. Video showed Kerry Lee Thomas prone on the ground when a canine handler released the dog. The district judge ruled that a jury could find Eric Bruss and Wayne Schultz saw the bite, had time to object, and failed to act; she denied them qualified immunity. The officers say prior cases did not clearly require bystanders to intervene in a canine apprehension controlled by a trained handler. Thomas says the Constitution clearly barred the force and existing bystander cases gave ample warning, regardless of the instrument used.

Thomas v. Bruss (No. 25-20590) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 4, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit considers whether two environmental groups should have been allowed into litigation over federal protection of the lesser prairie-chicken. The Fish and Wildlife Service listed northern and southern populations under the Endangered Species Act. Texas, other states, and industry groups challenged the rule. The environmental groups first sought to intervene while the federal government was defending it, then tried again after the government changed position and asked the district judge to vacate the rule. Both requests were denied, and the listing was vacated. The groups say the timing rulings left them no fair point to defend the rule. The appellees say intervention came too late and dispute whether the groups can obtain relief from the vacatur.

Texas v. U.S. Department of the Interior (No. 25-50747) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 4, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit reviews bank-fraud convictions arising from a check-kiting scheme, moving checks among accounts to create artificial balances before they clear. Charlie Simpson and Charles Gardner worked for two northern Louisiana home-health companies. A jury convicted both of conspiracy and Simpson of four bank-fraud counts. Gardner says salary and bonus evidence let prosecutors blur motive with the object of the fraud, and the judge should have limited how jurors used it. Simpson says the judge admitted his messages to prove intent but excluded messages and banking-history evidence supporting his defense. The government says jurors received the correct law, the challenged evidence was limited, and the proof of fraud was overwhelming.

United States v. Simpson (No. 25-30580) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 5, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit considers whether a judge followed the required process before revoking Terrance Morgan's supervised release, the court monitoring that follows prison. Morgan admitted drug violations, missed probation obligations, and a state battery conviction, then completed thirty days of inpatient treatment. The judge revoked release and imposed eight months in prison. Morgan says the judge treated revocation as automatic, ignored the treatment exception, used outdated sentencing guidelines, relied on unsupported assumptions, and denied a continuance. The government says the judge considered treatment, the guideline error caused no prejudice, and the other rulings were within his discretion. On August 14, the panel affirmed in a published opinion. It held that the judge implicitly considered treatment and that the guideline error was harmless because it did not affect the result.

United States v. Morgan (No. 26-30018) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 5, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit reviews summary judgment ending civil-rights claims from a 2021 San Antonio police shooting. During a hostage standoff, Angel Sanchez emerged from an apartment holding a shotgun and officers opened fire. A bullet entered the apartment and killed Neida Tijerina. Maria Tijerina sued three officers and the city under Section 1983. On appeal, she concedes that Officers Jose Claire and Nicholas Rodgers acted reasonably. Her remaining claim focuses on Officer Johnny Aguirre, who fired nine rifle rounds in less than two seconds. Tijerina says a jury could find that volley unreasonable because Aguirre knew hostages remained inside. The officers say Sanchez remained a threat and no clearly established law prohibited the volley. The city says there was no constitutional violation and no policy or training failure that caused one.

Tijerina v. City of San Antonio (No. 25-50719) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 5, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit hears a second appeal over two one-year legal-services contracts with Hinds County, Mississippi. In 2019, the county retained lawyer Pieter Teeuwissen and his firm. A newly elected board ended the contracts three months later and stopped paying. The first appeal held that Mississippi law allowed the prior board to bind its successors for that year. On remand, the county argued that two contract terms violated state attorney-ethics rules. The district court refused to add that late defense and granted partial summary judgment to the plaintiffs. The county says it raised illegality early enough. The plaintiffs say the new defense would require reopening discovery and motions, and the county cannot reverse its earlier position that the contracts were valid.

Teeuwissen v. Hinds County (No. 25-60605) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 5, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit again hears a lawsuit over a 2021 crash between Houston police officer Christopher Cabrera and Charles Payne Senior, who died from his injuries. Cabrera was returning to his station after booking a DWI suspect. The Payne family says he drove seventy miles per hour in a thirty-five zone and looked at his in-car computer before impact. Houston says Payne's left turn alone caused the crash. A prior panel let the family's Texas Tort Claims Act case proceed at the pleading stage. After discovery, the district court again rejected Houston's governmental-immunity defense. Houston says the evidence now defeats negligence, Cabrera was still responding to the 9-1-1 call, and another statutory rule bars the claim. The family says factual disputes belong at trial and part of this appeal is premature.

Payne v. City of Houston, Texas (No. 25-20492) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 5, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit considers whether Peniel Olibris's firearms-smuggling conviction makes him removable under an immigration provision covering prohibited exports. Olibris admitted helping buy seventy-seven firearms and export fifty to Haiti in cars. He says neighboring references to espionage, sabotage, terrorism, and genocide limit it to conduct affecting national security or public safety, and the agency made no such finding. The government says any prohibited export is enough. Olibris also challenges the denial of Convention Against Torture protection and the immigration judge's use of outside evidence after the record closed. On August fourteenth, the court denied his petition. The majority read the export clause broadly and upheld the other rulings; Judge King dissented on the statute's scope.

Olibris v. Blanche (No. 25-60322) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 5, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit reviews the FCC's 38.1 percent Universal Service Fund contribution factor for late 2025. The fund supports telecommunications for rural and low-income users, schools, libraries, and rural health providers. Consumers' Research says the Supreme Court's earlier decision made Section 254's funding limits mandatory, yet the FCC ignored those limits and the group's comments. It also challenges Congress's delegation to the FCC and the role of the private administrator, USAC. The FCC says the statute supplies adequate limits, the agency controls every funding decision, and USAC performs supervised administrative work. Intervenors defend the funded programs. Consumers' Research asks the court to vacate the factor.

Consumers' Research v. FCC (No. 25-60535) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 5, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit considers whether a Texas receivership court could block UniBank from collecting distributions owed to borrowers it financed. The borrowers invested in what the SEC alleged was a Ponzi scheme, and the receiver proposed dividing recovered money by each victim's net loss. UniBank says its loan agreements gave it security interests in the borrowers' distributions. The receiver says the bank should be treated like the other victims rather than paid first. The district court accepted the receiver's recommendation. UniBank appeals.

Black v. UniBank (No. 25-50986) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 5, 2026.

The Fifth Circuit considers what process San Antonio owes a lender when it impounds vehicles securing its loans. Santander held liens on thirty-four vehicles. The city's ordinance let officials deem a vehicle abandoned after twenty days, but generally required Santander to show the borrower was thirty days behind before repossession. Santander calls that gap an impossibility trap. It says the city offered no meaningful hearing before keeping or selling the cars, continued the seizures after the safety reason for towing ended, and took the collateral without compensation. The city and Alanis Wrecker Service say Santander received notices, access to hearings about the tow and state-court remedies, and reasonable conditions for release. The district court ruled for both defendants without a trial. Santander appeals.

Santander Consumer v. City of San Antonio (No. 25-50682) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 6, 2026.