On the Supreme Court's docket this term: Workplace disputes, gay marriage wedding cakes, and gambling in New Jersey

Share
×

Supreme Court (U.S.)

On the Supreme Court's docket this term: Workplace disputes, gay marriage wedding cakes, and gambling in New Jersey

  • On October 2nd, the Supreme Court, now at full strength with nine justices, will begin its 2017 term with a number of high profile cases that are likely to impact both Wall Street and Main Street.

    The calendar is front loaded with arguments on key business cases involving arbitration law and corporate liability, as well as what legal experts say could be one of the biggest election law cases in decades.

    The court calendar is only half full, but has more controversial cases waiting in the wings. Court watchers and legal experts see the return of "5-4" decisions, as a divided court struggles to build consensus—one case at a time.

    Recently CNBC broke down a handful of the more important cases on the docket:

    The U.S. Supreme Court
    Yuri Gripas | Reuters
  • EPIC SYSTEMS CORP. V. LEWIS;

  • ERNST & YOUNG LLP V. MORRIS;

  • NLRB V. MURPHY OIL

    The first case to be argued on Monday will see a trio of labor versus management lawsuits involving employees at Ernst & Young and Murphy Oil, among others.

    The court must decide when it comes to resolving workplace disputes which federal law carries more weight: Management favors the Federal Arbitration Act. However, labor unions, concerned about the widespread and growing use of mandatory arbitration agreements, argue the National Labor Relations Act protects the right to organize or file class action lawsuits.

    The high court's decision could have a significant impact on how employer-employee disputes are resolved in the future.

    Mark Weinberger, Global Chairman and CEO of Ernst and Young.
    Mary Catherine Wellons | CNBC
  • JESNER V. ARAB BANK

    Victims of terrorist attacks by Palestinians are suing the bank they allege financed the attacks. At issue: Can corporations be sued for human rights violations abroad? If the high court rules yes, then American corporations could face liability.

    A Palestinian protester hurls stones toward Israeli troops during clashes in the West Bank city of Hebron, October 18, 2015.
    Mussa Qawasma | Reuters
  • GILL V. WHITFORD

    On October 3rd, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Gill v. Whitford, a challenge to the redistricting plan passed by Wisconsin's Republican-controlled legislature in 2011.

    A lower court struck down the plan last year, saying it was gerrymandered to give Republicans an advantage. Wisconsin will argue if the lower court's decision is allowed to stand, it will open the door to "unprecedented intervention in the American political process."

    An outside view of Bascom Hall on the campus of the University of Wisconsin in Madison.
    Getty Images
  • Same sex marriage
    Thinkstock | Stockbyte | Getty Images
  • MASTERPIECE CAKE SHOP V. COLORADO CIVIL RIGHTS COMMISSION

    The most controversial case this term involves wedding cakes for same sex couples. Cake shop operator Jack Phillips, says making wedding cakes celebrating gay marriages violates his religious beliefs. Colorado law prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation.

    Now the justices must take on a collision between first amendment freedoms and anti-discrimination laws.

  • CARPENTER V. UNITED STATES


    Do cops need a search warrant for GPS cell phone records tracking location and movement? The outcome could be the most important digital privacy case in decades.

    Placing furniture with the IKEA AR app
    Nina Raja | CNBC
  • CHRISTIE V. NCAA

    Named after the Garden State's outgoing governor, Chris Christie, New Jersey's efforts to legalize sports betting at casinos and race tracks is shaping up as a battle over the balance of power between states and the federal government.

    New Jersey Governor Chris Christie.
    Getty Images
  • TRUMP V. INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT

    President Trump's previous travel ban is now off the Supreme Court's calendar. The Court acted after the White House announced it was replacing the expired previous executive order with a more tailored ban on eight countries.

    The justices now want to be briefed on whether the new travel order makes the previous case moot.

    Activists demonstrate as travelers arrive on the first day of the the partial reinstatement of the Trump travel ban at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) on June 29, 2017 in Los Angeles, California.
    David McNew | Getty Images