The Byron White Center Hosts 2025 SCOTUS Preview

The Byron White Center for the Study of American Constitutional Law kicked off the spring semester with its annual SCOTUS Preview event, offering the Colorado Law community a glimpse into key cases before the United States Supreme Court. Professor Deep Gulasekaram, the Director of the White Center, served as the moderator, guiding discussions on constitutional protections, religious freedoms, environmental policy, and digital rights. 

The discussion began with United States v. Skrmetti, a case addressing Tennessee’s law prohibiting gender-affirming care for minors. The law, part of a broader trend of restrictions on transgender rights, was challenged under the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause. Professor Scott Skinner-Thompson examined whether alleged discriminatory intent—such as "trans animus"—plays a role in determining constitutional violations and whether Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), a landmark LGBTQ+ rights case, might influence the Court’s reasoning. 

Next, Apache Stronghold v. United States was highlighted for its potential impact on religious freedoms and Indigenous sovereignty. Professor Kristen Carpenter explained the case’s focus on Oak Flat, a sacred site for the Western Apache that sits atop one of the world’s largest copper deposits. Despite its significance for Apache religious practices, the federal government considers it public land and has approved mining operations that would permanently destroy it. The case raises questions about First Amendment protections and the 1852 treaty between the U.S. and the Apache, as well as whether current precedent adequately protects Indigenous sacred sites. 

Environmental law took center stage with Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, CO, a case addressing the scope of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Professor Jonathan Skinner-Thompson led the discussion on whether federal agencies must assess broader environmental consequences, such as increased wildfire risks and potential oil spills, when approving projects like the proposed railway spur line for crude oil transport. He emphasized the need for clearer standards on the depth of environmental impact reviews required under NEPA. 

In the realm of free speech and digital regulation, Professor Blake Reid guided the conversation on two significant First Amendment cases. In Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, he explored Texas’s age verification law for online pornography and whether it imposes an undue burden on adults’ access to protected speech. The case revisits longstanding precedent and questions whether rational basis review, rather than strict scrutiny, is the appropriate standard. 

TikTok v. Garland emerged as one of the most high-profile cases of the term. TikTok is challenging the federal government’s Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act, which bars app stores from hosting TikTok and imposes severe penalties for violations. Professor Reid analyzed the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision to uphold the law and its implications for free speech in the digital age, particularly regarding government control over foreign-owned platforms. 

With a docket filled with high-stakes constitutional questions, the 2025 SCOTUS term promises to shape critical areas of law. Professor Gulasekaram’s moderation ensured a dynamic and engaging discussion. The Byron White Center’s annual preview continues to provide an accessible and insightful forum for students, faculty, staff, and community members to analyze the Court’s evolving jurisprudence. Stay tuned for future events as these cases unfold and impact constitutional law nationwide.