Hencely v. Fluor Corporation

A case in which the Court will decide whether district courts may consider sentencing disparities created by the First Step Act’s nonretroactive reduction of mandatory minimum penalties—which can result in defendants serving sentences decades longer than those imposed for identical conduct today—when determining whether "extraordinary and compelling reasons" warrant a sentence reduction under the compassionate release statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

A case in which the Court will decide whether a combination of “extraordinary and compelling reasons” that may warrant a discretionary sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. §3582(c)(1)(A) can include reasons that may also be alleged as grounds for vacatur of a sentence under 28 U.S.C. §2255.

A case in which the Court will decide whether district courts may consider sentencing disparities created by the First Step Act’s nonretroactive reduction of mandatory minimum penalties—which can result in defendants serving sentences decades longer than those imposed for identical conduct today—when determining whether "extraordinary and compelling reasons" warrant a sentence reduction under the compassionate release statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i).

A case in which the Court will decide whether an order denying a government contractor’s claim of derivative sovereign immunity under Yearsley v. W.A. Ross Construction Co. is immediately appealable under the collateral-order doctrine, which permits interlocutory appeals of certain non-final orders that conclusively determine important issues separate from the merits.

A case in which the Court will decide whether an individual may sue a government official in his individual capacity for damages for violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA).

A case in which the Court will decide whether the International Emergency Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1701 (“IEEPA”), permits the president to impose tariffs.

A case in which the Court will decide whether the International Emergency Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. § 1701 (“IEEPA”), permits the president to impose tariffs.

A case in which the Court will decide whether Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) imposes any time limit to set aside a void default judgment for lack of personal jurisdiction.

A case in which the Court will decide whether a federal court’s final judgment must be vacated if it is later determined that the case lacked complete diversity at the time of removal from state court, and whether a plaintiff can defeat diversity jurisdiction after removal by amending the complaint to assert a viable claim against a nondiverse defendant.

A case in which the Court will decide whether federal contractors enjoy immunity from state-law tort suits because they are integrated into combat operations, even when they violate military orders and contractual duties.