This article originally appeared as a Gavel to Gavel guest column in the Journal Record on June 11, 2025.
By: Hilda Loury
Hilda Loury
In a striking display of unity among the nation’s highest court, on June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court released six near-unanimous opinions in a single day, covering issues ranging from reverse discrimination to gun manufacturer liability, faith-based tax breaks, and international law.
SCOTUS declines to hear ADA class action
In Labcorp v. Davis, persons with visual impairments filed a class action under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California law, alleging the check-in kiosks at certain medical facilities lacked accessibility. While class action lawyers anticipated the Court’s guidance as it related to uninjured class members, SCOTUS dismissed the case without a ruling on the merits.
SCOTUS lowers standard for ‘reverse discrimination’ lawsuits
In Ames v. Ohio Department of Youth Services, a woman sued her employer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, alleging discrimination based on her heterosexual orientation. SCOTUS rejected the heightened evidentiary standard for “majority-group plaintiffs,” reasoning that Title VII bars discrimination against “any individual” because of protected characteristics and regardless of majority or minority status.
SCOTUS rejects Mexico’s lawsuit against US gun manufacturers
In Smith & Wesson v. Mexico, Mexico sued U.S. gunmakers under an exception to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a federal law that shields gunmakers and dealers from liability when crimes are committed with their products. Finding that Mexico’s complaint failed to show how gunmakers contributed to arms trafficking to drug cartels, SCOTUS barred the lawsuit pursuant to PLCAA.
SCOTUS strikes down Wisconsin law in religious tax exemption case
In Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor & Industry Review Commission, a faith-based group sought and was denied a tax exemption under Wisconsin law because the group was not “operated primarily for religious purposes” as it “neither engaged in proselytization nor limited their charitable services to Catholics.” Pursuant to the strict scrutiny standard of judicial review, SCOTUS struck down the Wisconsin law for violating the First Amendment.
SCOTUS lowers standard for US jurisdiction over foreign states
In Devas v. Antrix, an appellate court reversed a lower court’s confirmation of a $1.29 billion arbitration award because the plaintiff failed to show “minimum contacts” sufficient for a U.S. court to exercise jurisdiction over an Indian state-backed defendant. SCOTUS rejected the heightened legal standard, clarifying the plain text of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which generally protects foreign states from being sued in U.S. courts, speaks for itself.
SCOTUS preserves the finality of judgments
The victims of terrorist attacks sued a Lebanese bank under anti-terrorism laws, alleging the bank’s services contributed to terrorism. Despite the fascinating question presented, SCOTUS resolved a narrow issue pertaining to the “extraordinary circumstances” required to reopen a final judgment, clarifying that the heightened legal standard required to reopen a case supersedes a plaintiff’s typical right to liberally amend pleadings.
About the author:
Hilda Loury represents individuals and corporations in a broad range of matters, including complex commercial litigation, contractual disputes, commercial debt collection matters, business defense, and insurance defense.
CONTACT: hloury@phillipsmurrah.com | 405.552.2409
Visit Phillips Murrah on social media:
