Docket Science

The Supreme Court's 2026-27 term opened Monday against the weakest public confidence in the institution since Gallup began tracking it in 1972. The conservative 6-3 majority that produced a blockbuster prior term now faces a docket that is less obviously landmark but no less consequential for business and policy.

Five themes define what to watch:

• The emergency docket isn't slowing down. The Trump administration has already filed more emergency applications in its second term than during all of its first, reshaping immigration and election rules in real time with minimal explanation or precedent.

• Immigration is back in the spotlight. The Court agreed to review the administration's policy of denying bond hearings to noncitizens held indefinitely while contesting deportation – the third major pillar of the administration's detention strategy to reach the justices.

• The federalism fault line. An ongoing tension reflected on the confirmed docket is a long-running fight over which level of government regulates issues of national significance. Suncor v. Boulder County, argued yesterday, asks whether a Colorado county can use state tort law to hold fossil fuel companies liable for climate change – with 60-plus similar suits and the future of local climate litigation hanging on the answer. The bench surprised observers by pushing back hard on Suncor’s case. Three justices called its legal arguments “slippery” and “complicated.” Justice Alito's recusal over oil stock holdings means a 4-4 tie is possible, which would let Boulder's suit move forward.

• The culture wars rage on. Religious liberty, guns, and citizenship issues are all under consideration, as well as transgender rights, a topic the court has repeatedly revisited in recent terms.

• The business docket will be busy. Four cases carry far less political baggage, but significant practical stakes: ERISA pleading standards (Anderson v. Intel), video privacy and tracking pixels (Salazar v. Paramount), Title IX employee claims (Crowther) and contempt standards (Apple v. Epic) will all have important implications for the business community.

With four weeks to go until the midterms, Democrats hold their biggest generic ballot lead of the cycle – but the map may not let them cash it in. FGS Global’s Alternative Futures team has outlined what you need to know:

• The national lead and the battleground lead are not the same number. Cook Political Report's September Battleground District Project found Democrats leading 49%-47% among likely voters in the 37 competitive districts where control will be decided – seats Trump carried by five points in 2024. Nate Silver's likely-voter model puts the national Democratic advantage at 8.8 points. Because redistricting has concentrated decisive races in a small, uneven set of districts, that lead will not translate proportionally into seats.

• The map variable is the reason. Republicans enacted favorable district lines in at least seven states. Courts blocked Democratic counter efforts in Virginia and New York. Those new maps raise the number of seats Democrats need to win even in a favorable environment – and by every structural measure, the environment is favorable.

• The Senate presents its own math problem. Democrats need a net gain of four seats for a majority, and Cook puts possible gains at one to five. They must hold Michigan and New Hampshire – both now rated toss-ups – while netting four seats elsewhere. Cook rates the chamber a true toss-up for the first time this cycle, with seven races that could go either way. North Carolina, currently rated lean Democratic, is the one Republican-held seat outside the toss-up column trending their way.

Reach out to the Alternative Futures team at us-midterms@fgsglobal.com to discuss what the current landscape means for your organization.

The forces that once contained left-wing populist energy have quietly eroded. What's building now is structurally different from the Warren surge, Occupy, or the Bernie moment – and a pincer is closing on business from both directions. In a recent analysis, FGS Partner Graeme Trayner breaks it down:

• The fuel is stacking. Previous waves ran on a single grievance – this one is compounding. Housing, AI anxiety, concentrated wealth, and a pervasive sense that elites play by different rules are all moving in the same direction at once. 

• It won't announce itself. Voter anger doesn't dissipate – it finds new forms. Hostility toward data centers is already a proxy for broader resentment about corporate power. Companies waiting for an obvious attack through familiar channels and from known voices are operating with the wrong antennae.

• The math has shifted. Focaldata finds 47% of Democrats say the party pays too little attention to corporate power; only 21% say too much. Gen Z is now a decisive voting bloc, and there is no longer a Democratic establishment with the muscle to contain it.

• The hedge has gone. The assumption that Republican politics provides a reliable counterweight to left-wing pressure no longer holds. Economic nationalism and right-wing populism are building their own frameworks for going after business.

• The moment is now. Even market-friendly "Hopeful Moderates" back rent controls and healthcare regulation over competition. Companies that act now can shape the terms of engagement. Those that wait will find the terms set for them.

To learn more, read Graeme’s full analysis on Linkedin.