Split Supreme Court blocks first religious charter school in Oklahoma

We’re expecting one or more opinions from the court at 10 a.m. EDT. Join us for the live blog, beginning at 9:30 a.m.

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Thursday morning read:

• Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Shield DOGE From Releasing Records (Abbie VanSickle, The New York Times)
• Disney suspends Venezuelan workers on Supreme Court ruling (Fabiola Zerpa, Los Angeles Times)
• Vance says Roberts is ‘profoundly wrong’ about judiciary’s role to check executive branch (Kit Maher, CNN)
• Trump Judge Slams Supreme Court ‘Disrespect’ After Ruling (Jenna Sundel, Newsweek)
• Jackson most vocal member on Supreme Court bench: Analysis (Ella Lee and Zach Schonfeld, The Hill)

This article was updated on May 21 at 2:38 p.m.

The Trump administration came to the Supreme Court on Wednesday morning, once again asking the justices to take action on their emergency docket. U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer urged the court to temporarily pause an order by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., that would require the Department of Government Efficiency to provide information in a lawsuit filed under the Freedom of Information Act. Sauer told the justices that requiring DOGE as a “presidential advisory body” to respond to the plaintiffs’ requests, a process known as discovery, “clearly violates the separation of powers” and “will significantly distract” from DOGE’s “mission of identifying and eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse in the federal government.”

Chief Justice John Roberts instructed CREW to file a response to the government’s request by noon on Friday, May 23. 

Each weekday, we select a short list of news articles and commentary related to the Supreme Court. Here’s the Wednesday morning read:

• Supreme Court Orders Maine House to Restore Voting Power to Censured Lawmaker, for Now (Abbie VanSickle, The New York Times)
• What’s next for Venezuelans after Supreme Court allows Trump to revoke protected status?(Daniella Silva, NBC News)
• The Supreme Court’s Last Chance to Rein in Universal Injunctions (Michael A. Fragoso, City Journal)
• A Supreme Court Injustice to a District Judge (Paul G. Cassell, The Wall Street Journal)
• The Supreme Court stands up for democracy — and for an anti-trans lawmaker (Ian Millhiser, Vox)

Coming up: Tomorrow the court expects to issue one or more opinions from the current term. We’ll be live at 9:30 a.m. EDT that day for the opinions.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday afternoon required the clerk of the Maine House of Representatives to count votes by a Maine lawmaker who was censured for a social media post about a transgender athlete at a high school track meet in that state. In a brief unsigned order, the justices granted a request filed by Laurel Libby, a Republican who represents a district in the southern part of the state, to clear the way for her to vote while her appeal continues in the lower courts and, if necessary, the Supreme Court. 

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the court’s ruling. In a five-page opinion, she lamented what she characterized as the “watering down of our Court’s standards for granting emergency relief,” calling it “an unfortunate development.” 

Justice Sonia Sotomayor also indicated, without more, that she would have denied Libby’s request. 

The Trump administration notified the Supreme Court on Monday that it will not defend a federal campaign finance law that restricts the amount of money that political parties can spend in coordination with a candidate for office. In a brief responding to a petition for review filed by the NRSC, U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the court that although the Department of Justice “has a longstanding policy of defending challenged federal statutes,” it has “determined that this is the rare case that warrants an exception to that general approach.” 

The justices are likely to act on the case before their summer recess. If, as seems likely, they grant the NRSC’s petition for review, they could hear argument in the case in the fall, with a decision to follow sometime in 2026.