Recap: Week of January 12 Oral Arguments
Recap: Week of January 12 Oral Arguments  
Podcast: SCOTUS Oral Arguments and Opinions
Published On: Fri Jan 16 2026
Description: The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in four major cases during the week of January 12, 2026, covering federal contractor jurisdiction, transgender athletics rights, and state agency immunity. The Court issued its first four opinions of the term while demonstrating reluctance to expand constitutional protections in sensitive areas like transgender rights and police emergency powers. Justice concerns about nationwide chaos and disruption emerged as recurring themes across multiple cases involving federalism and state authority questions.Chevron Corporation v. Plaquemines Parish Question Presented: Whether federal contractor removal statute permits federal jurisdiction for conduct "relating to" government contractsOverview: Louisiana oil dumping lawsuit raises federalism questions about protecting contractors from local bias versus state court expertise.Main Analysis:Paul Clement invoked Daniel Webster's 1812 commentary about federal courts protecting nationally important projects from local prejudiceChevron fears massive verdict after Louisiana secured $744 million judgment in similar WWII oil caseChief Justice Roberts expressed "butterfly effect" concerns about sweeping federal jurisdiction for paper clip contractorsBoth sides conceded Fifth Circuit test failed to follow statutory textPrediction: Victory for Chevron or remand for different legal test application. Court disliked Fifth Circuit approach.Key Tension: Federal protection from local bias versus state expertise in Louisiana environmental lawLittle v. Hecox and West Virginia v. B.P.J.Question Presented: Whether Title IX permits excluding transgender students from gender-aligned athleticsOverview: Parallel cases create constitutional clash over state biological sex requirements versus federal anti-discrimination protections.Main Analysis:Majority seemed disinclined to draw constitutional lines protecting transgender peopleGovernment's contradictory positions caught justices' attention - supports state biological sex requirements while challenging California's opposing lawFollows Skrmetti decision recognizing broad state authority over transgender issuesNo appetite for constitutional intervention when states actively disagreePrediction: Idaho and West Virginia victory. Court reluctant to wade into transgender debates.Key Insight: Next frontier involves legitimacy of state laws protecting transgender statusCSX Galette v. NJ Transit Corp. Question Presented: Whether state-created corporations retain sovereign immunity despite corporate structureOverview: Transit authority immunity dispute affects numerous state agencies using corporate structures.Main Analysis:Court focused intensely on formality versus functionality questionJustice Kavanaugh expressed "chaos" concerns...