Category News

A number of landmark decisions, all of which the US Supreme Court has rendered, cover everything from school reading lists to healthcare coverage.

Before taking a few months of recess, the court made its final decisions for the 2024 term on Friday. In October, the nine justices on the bench will convene again.

The justices, however, made headlines before they left. The six-person conservative majority decided to limit the ability of courts to impose universal injunctions that would block executive actions nationwide, a significant victory for the president’s administration.

Trump has consistently attacked his executive branch’s use of court injunctions.

The conservative majority on the Supreme Court banded together again in two other decisions. In one decision, parents were able to opt out of LGBTQ-themed educational materials, while the other gave Texas the go-ahead to place restrictions on young people’s access to online porn.

However, some conservative justices sided with their three left-wing colleagues when they made the decision regarding healthcare access. Their final decisions for the 2024 term are presented in this summary.

The court upholds the rules for preventive care.

The Supreme Court’s usual ideological divides were broken up in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management, which was a result of this case.

Sonia Sotomayor, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and Elena Kagan joined the court’s liberal branch, which includes three conservative justices: Amy Coney Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh, and John Roberts.

A government task force’s ability to determine what types of preventive healthcare were required by the nation’s insurance providers.

The Affordable Care Act, a piece of legislation passed under former President Barack Obama to expand access to healthcare, was the most recent case to challenge its constitutionality.

A section of the act that allowed a panel of health experts under the Department of Health and Human Services to determine what preventive services should be covered for no cost was the subject of this case.

However, a group of people and Christian-owned businesses had objected to the task force’s legality.

They claimed that the expert panel was in violation of the Constitution’s Appointments Clause, which mandates that the president choose and approve certain political appointees.

Prior to the task force’s decision, the group had successfully prevailed in favor of the group’s request that all HIV prevention medications be classified as preventive care.

The Supreme Court’s decision did not consider that particular injunction. Justice Kavanaugh, speaking for the majority, argued that the task force was legitimate because it consisted of “inferior officers” and didn’t require Senate approval.

Texas’s age restrictions on pornography are rejected by the court.

In an effort to protect minors from offensive content, several states, including Texas, require users to verify their ages before accessing pornographic websites.

Free Speech Coalition v. Ken Paxton was the subject of the Supreme Court’s scrutiny of Texas’ law on Friday, according to the case.

The Free Speech Coalition is a non-profit organization that works for adults’ entertainment. The attorney general of Texas, Paxton, was sued by the group for contending that the age-verification law would impair First Amendment protections, which include the right to free expression, free association, and privacy.

The plaintiffs noted the dangers associated with sharing personally identifying information online, including the possibility of leaking sensitive data like birthdates. For instance, the American Civil Liberties Union warned that Texas’s law “robs people of anonymity.”

Justice Clarence Thomas acknowledged in a letter to the conservative majority on the Supreme Court that “submitting to age verification is a burden on the exercise” of First Amendment rights.

However, he added that “adults have no First Amendment right to completely disregard age verification.” The majority of the time upheld Texas’s law.

The court grants children the right to reject LGBTQ educational material.

With the ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority continued its long history of victories for religious freedom.

The Montgomery County Board of Education in Maryland, where books with LGBTQ themes had been approved for use in primary school textbooks, was the subject of the case.

A picture book called Love, Violet, for instance, told the tale of a young girl who mustering the courage to give a Valentine’s Day to a female classmate. Another book, Pride Puppy, follows a young girl looking for her missing dog in a parade to honor LGBTQ pride.

Parents of the school district’s students criticized the content on religious grounds, and some books, like Pride Puppy, were eventually dropped.

However, the board eventually made the announcement that it would block parents from withdrawing from the approved material because it would disrupt the learning environment.

Some education officials claimed that the inclusion of LGBTQ people in mainstream culture would impose a stigma on those who identify as LGBTQ and that this was simply a fact of life.

Justice Samuel Alito claimed in the majority’s decision that the education board’s policy “conveys that parents’ religious views are not welcome in the “fully inclusive environment” that the Board claims to foster.”

According to Alito, “the curriculum itself also betrays an attempt to impose ideological conformity with particular views on sexuality and gender.”

The use of nationwide injunctions is restricted by the court.

The Supreme Court’s conservative supermajority, it seems, decided another decision, which was probably the biggest of the day.

The Trump administration had appealed the use of nationwide injunctions all the way to the country’s highest court in the case Trump v. CASA.

Trump’s executive order, which he signed on the first day of his second term, was in danger. The Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution sought to simplify the concept of birthright citizenship.

Almost everyone who was born on US soil would be granted citizenship regardless of their parents’ nationality in the past.

Trump has, however, criticized the overuse of birthright citizenship. He placed restrictions on the birthright of a person based on their parents’ immigration status in his executive order.

As soon as the executive order was made public, legal arguments erupted against the decision to support birthright citizenship regardless of the parent’s nationality. Federal courts in states like Maryland and Washington quickly enacted injunctions to stop the executive order from being effective.

The Supreme Court did not consider whether Trump’s decree regarding birthright citizenship was valid on Friday. However, it did evaluate a petition from the Trump administration, contending that the judicial system had overreacted.

Trump backed off of the conservative supermajority, saying that specific plaintiffs’ needs should be the focus of any injunctions. However, class action lawsuits might be one of the possible exceptions.

The majority’s decision was written by Amy Coney Barrett, the court’s most recent addition and Trump appointee.

Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh –  One of the dozens of refugee camps, a densely populated coastal town in southeast Bangladesh, echoes through the lush lanes of one of the dozens of refugee camps.

Just for a moment, the sounds manage to soften the harsh living conditions faced by the more than one million people who live here in the world’s largest refugee camp.

Eight years after being ethnically cleansed from their homes in neighboring Myanmar by a predominately Buddhist military regime, the Rohingya Muslim refugees in Bangladesh are now one of the most forgotten populations in the world.

During a visit to the squat camps in May, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres remarked, “Cox’s Bazar is ground zero for the impact of budget cuts on people in desperate need.”

The UN chief’s visit followed United States President Donald Trump’s gutting of the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which has stalled several key projects in the camps, and the United Kingdom announcing cuts to foreign aid in order to increase defence spending.

As a result of the severe blows to foreign aid, the camps’ healthcare has suffered.

They refer to me as “langhra” (lame).

Seated outside his makeshift bamboo hut, Jahid Alam told Al Jazeera how, before being forced to become a refugee, he had worked as a farmer and also fished for a living in the Napura region of his native Myanmar. He first noticed his leg swelling up suddenly in 2016 at the time.

I was farming when I suddenly felt the intense itch in my left leg, Alam said. “My leg soon turned red and began swelling up. I attempted to ice it up as soon as I could. But it was ineffective.

A local doctor prescribed an ointment, but the itch continued, and so did the swelling.

Soon after, he became dependent on his family, finding it challenging to stand or walk, and unable to work.

He made the decision to send his family to Bangladesh a year later when Myanmar’s military began torturing and burning Rohingya homes in his village.

Alam stayed behind to look after the cows on his land. But the military immediately threatened to take him out of Bangladesh and join his family there.

Since arriving in Cox’s Bazar, the 53-year-old has been receiving treatment from Doctors Without Borders, known by its French names MSF, in the Kutupalong region, but it seems likely that his leg has been amputated. While some doctors have said he has Elephantiasis – an infection that causes enlargement and swelling of limbs – a final diagnosis is yet to be made.

Alam is also dealing with stigma as well because of his disability.

When they discover that I can’t walk properly, he said, “they call me langhra.”

But, he adds: &nbsp, “If God has given me this disease and disability, he also gave me the opportunity to come to this camp and try to recover. I’m optimistic that my life will start over.

‘ The word “Amma” gives me hope ‘

Jahena Begum, who is seated in a dimly lit room in a small hut about ten minutes’ walk from Alam’s shelter, hopes aid organizations will continue to help the camps, particularly those who have disabilities.

Sumaiya Akter, 23, and her sons Harez, 19, and Ayas, 21, are blind and have a cognitive disorder that prevents them from speaking clearly. They are largely unaware of their surroundings.

As they aged into teenagers, Begum claims, “their vision gradually began to fade.”

The mother, a mother, patted her daughter’s leg, and it was very difficult to watch.

The young girl giggled, unaware of what was going on around her.

After the military in Myanmar burned their home down, Begum’s family moved to Cox’s Bazar about nine months ago.

“We managed to get to the camps with the family’s assistance. But life has been very hard for me”, said Begum, telling how she had single-handedly brought up her children since her husband’s death eight years ago.

She and her children have begun receiving eye exams and having scans to find out the cause of their disability.

They currently express everything through sound, the statement read. But the one word they speak, which is ‘ Amma’, meaning mother, shows me that they at least recognise me”, Begum said.

“The word “Amma” gives me hope and strength to try to treat them.” My children’s future should be better than mine.

The pain is emotional, not just physical, according to the statement.

Anowar Shah described fleeing Myanmar to save his life, along with losing a limb to a mine explosion, wearing a blue and pink striped collared shirt and a striped brown longyi, the cloth worn by both men and women there.

Shah said he was collecting firewood in his hometown Labada Prian Chey in Myanmar&nbsp, when his leg was blown off by the landmine last year.

According to a 2024 UN report, Myanmar is one of the most deadly nations for landmine and non-exploded explosives casualties, with more than 1, 000 victims recorded in 2023 alone, surpassing all other countries.

The 25-year-old Shah, who now uses crutches to move around, described those as “the longest, most agonizing days of my life.”

“Losing my leg shattered everything. I changed from providing and protecting to one who relies on others to get by on the job. He said, “I can’t even do simple tasks alone; I can’t move freely, I can’t work, and I can’t even do simple things.”

“I feel like I’ve become a burden to the people I love. The pain is deep and emotional, not just physical. Why did this happen to me, I keep asking myself.

More than 30 refugees in Bangladesh’s camps have been left disabled and dependent on other people after losing limbs to landmine explosions.

According to John Quinley, director of the rights organization Fortify Rights, all parties to the armed conflict in Myanmar have engaged in some form of landmine use.

“We know the Myanmar junta has used landmines over many years to bolster their bases. He added, “They also place them in rural areas where they have occupied and fled,” he said.

Abdul Hashim, 25, described how being struck by a landmine in Cox’s Bazar in February 2024 “drastically altered his life.”

“I have become dependent on others for even the simplest daily tasks. I once felt like a burden because I no longer contributed to my family,” he said.

Hashim has participated in a rehabilitation program at the Turkish Field Hospital, which includes balance exercises, stump care, and hygiene education. Since arriving in the camp, he has been receiving medication and physical therapy.

He has also been assessed for a prosthetic limb which currently costs about 50, 000 Bangladeshi Taka ($412). The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Australia suports the cost of these limbs.

“I still have some hope despite the trauma and hardship.” I dream of receiving a prosthetic leg soon, which would allow me to regain some independence and find work to support my family”, Hashim said.

The aid organization Humanity & Inclusion, who are experts in producing the prosthetic limbs in orthotic workshops outside the refugee camps, has distributed and fitted to camp residents a total of 14 prosthetic limbs.

As part of the organization’s rehabilitation program, which provides gait training to help them adapt to the use of prosthetic limbs regularly, both Hashim and Shah participate.

Tough decisions for aid workers

Aid workers are currently faced with difficult decisions as a result of cuts to foreign aid, making sure refugees in the camps are well-supported and can lead better lives after fleeing persecution.

A Bangladeshi healthcare worker who requested anonymity reportedly said, “We are having to choose between feeding people and providing education and healthcare due to aid cuts,” citing fear that his statement might affect US aid going forward. &nbsp,

Quinley of Fortify Rights argued that while aid funding is severely limited, the response to Rohingya refugees should be a shared responsibility across the region.

He claimed that “there needs to be a regional response,” particularly for those in Southeast Asia, to provide funding.

“Countries connected to the OIC (Organisation of Islamic Cooperation) in the Middle East could also give a lot more meaningful support”, he said.

He also suggested working with local humanitarian organizations, “whether it’s the Rohingya refugee groups themselves or the Bangladeshi nationals,” because they are the best at assisting their local communities.

He argued that governments around the world should support them because they are at the forefront of their ability to reach people who need support.

For the estimated one million refugees in Cox’s Bazar, urgent support is needed at this time, when funds grow ever scarce.

Only 30% of the total $852.4 million needed by the refugees was received, according to a Joint Response Plan created for the Rohingya in 2024.

Only 15% of the refugees’ funding was received as of May 2025, against an overall request for $934.5 million.

Cutting the aid budgets for the camps is a “short-sighted policy”, said Blandine Bouniol, deputy director of advocacy at Humanity &amp, Inclusion humanitarian group.

According to Bouniol, it will “devastate people” in the long run.