These are the cases left to be decided by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has roughly a few opinions to issue before the end of its term, which currently runs through July.

They include historic decisions such as former President Trump’s claims of criminal immunity, the merits of charges brought against more than 300 defendants on Jan. 6, and the potential collapse of an important administrative law known as Chevron deference.

Technically, the court has eight cases left to argue. However, several of those cases could be combined into a single opinion, such as the case involving Chevron and a set of social media moderation challenges in Florida and Texas, so it is expected to leave a total of six decisions.

The court will issue opinions on Friday morning and now on Monday morning, missing the traditional deadline of the end of June. The last day of the deadline has not been officially announced yet.

Here is the full list of cases still pending before the High Court.

Trump immunity (Trump v. United States)

The justices sat out the first presidential debate on Thursday before issuing a long-awaited decision on whether Trump is entitled to immunity from prosecution for official acts while in office.

Trump says his defense would require dismissal of charges in three of his criminal cases that have not yet gone to trial, and Trump’s appeal to the Supreme Court has held up his federal case scheduled for Jan. 6 for several months.

“Without presidential immunity from criminal prosecution, there can be no presidency as we know it,” D. John Sauer, Trump’s lead lawyer in the case, told the Supreme Court during oral arguments.

Michael Dreeben, who represented the case on behalf of special prosecutor Jack Smith, was spotted in the courtroom on Wednesday as the justices delivered their opinions, but so far the issue of immunity has not been among the issues made public.

January 6 obstruction charge (Fischer v. United States)

The Justice Department’s sweeping handling of the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol is under the microscope as rioter Joseph Fischer challenges the Obstruction Act, which criminalizes “corruptly” obstructing, obstructing, or interfering with an official government proceeding.

Prosecutors cited the fact that Congress certified the results of the 2020 presidential election that day, formally confirming President Biden’s victory over Trump, as a reason to charge Fischer and more than 350 other rioters.

But Fischer argues that the Justice Department overreached and misapplied the law against rioters, pointing to its origins in the Enron accounting scandal that sought to regulate document destruction.

During arguments in April, the justices seemed wary of applying the law because it could spell trouble for the government’s efforts to hold rioters accountable as well as for Trump’s case to overturn a federal election.

Chevron (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce)

Respect for Chevron may be on its deathbed.

The justices are considering whether to overturn a precedent underpinning administrative law that has given federal agencies across the government broad rulemaking authority.

During oral arguments, the conservative majority seemed poised to either limit Chevron’s reach or invalidate it entirely, which would dramatically wrest power from the executive branch if Congress did not speak clearly on the issue.

“You say don’t overturn the Chevron decision because it would be a shock to the system, but the reality is that Chevron itself shocks the system every four or eight years when a new administration comes in,” Judge Brett Kavanaugh told Biden administration lawyers during oral arguments.

Social media cases in Florida, Texas (NetChoice v. Paxton and Moody v. NetChoice)

Two cases involving the rights of social media companies remain pending before the Supreme Court, fraught with serious questions about online speech.

Tech industry groups have challenged laws in Florida and Texas that aim to prevent social media platforms from banning users for their political views, even if the platform’s policies have been violated. They argue that the laws — passed after the 2020 election, when conservatives worried their views were being unfairly censored by major platforms — trample on the right of private companies to decide what content to host.

Several justices expressed concern about the apparent abuse of rights, pointing to nontraditional platforms like Gmail and online marketplace Etsy that could suffer unintended consequences if the justices ruled in favor of the states. Kavanaugh made clear that the First Amendment was designed to protect businesses from government abuses — not the other way around.

Ticketing the Homeless (City of Grants Pass, Oregon vs. Johnson)

Unsheltered Americans could face new restrictions if the Supreme Court rules in favor of an Oregon city that tightens rules on sleeping in public.

Judges are considering whether cities will be able to ticket homeless people for public camping if there is no alternative shelter available for them after the city of Grants Pass, Oregon, tried to implement a law that would fine campers $295 a night for sleeping in in public parks.

A lower court ruled that the law constituted cruel and unusual punishment that city officials said prevented the implementation of “commonsense” laws aimed at cracking down on public camping.

Given record homelessness rates across the country, the justices’ ruling will dramatically change the lives of Americans without permanent housing. During the hearings, several judges admitted that the case was complicated.

Statute of Limitations (Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System)

Among the final remaining Supreme Court cases will resolve a split among the nation’s federal appeals courts over when plaintiffs can challenge government regulations in court.

Some lower courts — as well as the Biden administration — believe the six-year statute of limitations starts ticking once a federal agency issues its regulation.

But Corner Post, a truck stop gas station in North Dakota, says the timer won’t start running until regulations are written against it, which could result in more lawsuits.

Corner Post opened its doors in 2018 and is trying to challenge the Federal Reserve’s debit card cap regulations that went into effect seven years earlier.

For the latest news, weather, sports and streaming videos, head to The Hill.