United States | In the shadows

Many of the Supreme Court’s decisions are reached with no hearings or explanation

The nine justices are making more and more use of the “shadow docket”

|NEW YORK

IN FIVE WEEKS the Supreme Court will return from its summer break to hear a batch of new disputes, including clashes over abortion and guns. After scrutinising briefs from litigants and amici curiae (friends of the court), the justices will hear oral argument in these cases and—weeks or months later—release opinions explaining why one party won and the other lost. But this methodically adjudicated “merits docket” represents a shrinking proportion of the Supreme Court’s notable business. Although the justices handle about five dozen cases this way each year (down from more than 150 in the 1980s), they dispatch thousands of other legal tangles without fanfare—and often with scant explanation.

This article appeared in the United States section of the print edition under the headline “In the shadows”

Where next for global jihad?

From the August 26th 2021 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

Explore the edition

More from United States

Kamala Harris introduces “Coach” Tim Walz, her trusty running-mate

As Republicans seek to brand their rivals as dangerously liberal, Democrats are matching Donald Trump’s public displays of enthusiasm

Why Kamala Harris picked Tim Walz as her running-mate

Compared with a bolder but more divisive alternative, the Minnesota governor was the easier choice


Kamala Harris leads Donald Trump in our nationwide poll tracker

It is the first lead for a Democratic contender since October 2023


Simone Biles is the most decorated gymnast in history

Her triumphant comeback at the Paris Olympics confirms her as also one of the most popular

Why do conservatives in America love Zyn?

A nicotine pouch has stimulated America’s young men—and the culture wars