---
source_url: https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/scotustoday-for-tuesday-march-17/
---

Happy St. Patrick’s Day! We recommend celebrating by reading about [Supreme Court justices of Irish descent](https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/the-irish-court/).
At the Court
On Monday, the Supreme Court [announced](https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/031626zr1_5h25.pdf) that it will hear oral argument in April on whether the Trump administration can end a program that allows several thousand Syrians and approximately 350,000 Haitians to live in the United States temporarily. For more on the disputes, see Amy’s coverage in the On Site section below.
Hours earlier, Haitian nationals [urged](https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/trump-v-lesly-miot/) the Supreme Court to deny the Trump administration’s request to be allowed to remove their protected immigration status.
Also on Monday, the Supreme Court denied a [request](https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/king-v-florida/) for a stay of execution from Michael L. King, who is scheduled to be executed in Florida today.
A dispute over a land transfer and mining project involving a Native American sacred site in Arizona has returned to the [Supreme Court](https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/lopez-v-united-states-3/), this time on its interim docket.
The court has indicated that it may announce opinions on Friday at 10 a.m. EDT. We will be [live blogging](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/announcement-of-opinions-for-friday-march-20/) that morning beginning at 9:30.
The court will next hear arguments on Monday, the first day of its [March sitting](https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/terms/ot2025/).
Morning Reads
[Trump Slams Supreme Court, Says It ‘Ransacked’ America](https://www.newsweek.com/trump-slams-supreme-court-says-it-ransacked-america-11681858)
Khaleda Rahman, Newsweek
In a Truth Social post on Sunday, President Donald Trump revisited the Supreme Court’s tariffs ruling and continued to criticize the justices who ruled against him. “This completely inept and embarrassing Court was not what the Supreme Court of the United States was set up by our wonderful Founders to be. They are hurting our Country, and will continue to do so,” the president [wrote](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/116236559151421767). He continued, “Our Country was unnecessarily RANSACKED by the United States Supreme Court, which has become little more than a weaponized and unjust Political Organization.”
[Apache tribe members urge Supreme Court to protect sacred land from U.S. mine deal](https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/mar/16/apache-tribe-members-urge-supreme-court-protect-sacred-land-us-mine/)
Stephen Dinan, The Washington Times
Members of a Western Apache tribe have asked the court on its interim docket “to block a proposed land transfer to a mining company, saying it would destroy a sacred tribal place in Arizona” called Oak Flat or Chi’chil Bildagoteel, according to [The Washington Times](https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/mar/16/apache-tribe-members-urge-supreme-court-protect-sacred-land-us-mine/). “Apache members say the administration is breaking the law at every turn, violating the religious rights of the tribe, breaking environmental rules by not considering alternative mining practices, and trampling on historic preservation law.” The Supreme Court has declined to intervene in the dispute twice before, and “Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said both times that the court should have taken the case.”
[Resolution Copper to start drilling at Oak Flat after court decision](https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2026/03/16/resolution-copper-start-oak-flat-drilling/89153414007/?gnt-cfr=1&gca-cat=p&gca-uir=true&gca-epti=z116923p119750c119750e1169xxv116923d--50--b--50--&gca-ft=81&gca-ds=sophi)
Debra Utacia Krol, Arizona Republic
On Monday, Resolution Copper, the company planning to mine the Oak Flat area, filed a [response](https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25A1008/400913/20260316110130788_Resolution%20Opp%20to%20Admin%20Injunction%20for%20filing.pdf) to the Western Apache tribe members’ emergency application to the Supreme Court, explaining that “it would begin exploratory drilling in the Oak Flat area” and that “the land exchange occurred shortly after” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled in its favor, according to the [Arizona Republic](https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2026/03/16/resolution-copper-start-oak-flat-drilling/89153414007/?gnt-cfr=1&gca-cat=p&gca-uir=false&gca-epti=z118825p119750c119750e1100xxv118825&gca-ft=240&gca-ds=sophi). Resolution Copper’s filing noted “that initial work will utilize only existing roads and drill pads, so it will not produce any new surface disturbance or affect applicants’ access to Oak Flat.”
[Appeals court allows Trump to swiftly deport migrants to third countries](https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5786361-trump-administration-deportations-appeal/)
Zach Schonfeld, The Hill
A divided panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit “ruled Monday that the Trump administration may keep swiftly deporting migrants to countries where they have no ties as a legal challenge unfolds,” lifting “limits on the policy imposed by U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy,” according to [The Hill](https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5786361-trump-administration-deportations-appeal/). “Last year, the Trump administration went to the Supreme Court and won after Murphy limited third country removals at an earlier stage of the case. In his final ruling last month, Murphy said material differences had emerged and blocked the policy once again.”
[The Court Ruling in the Fed Chair’s Favor Is a Double-Edged Sword](https://www.wsj.com/economy/central-banking/the-court-ruling-in-the-fed-chairs-favor-is-a-double-edged-sword-122f2d35?mod=e2tw)
Nick Timiraos, The Wall Street Journal
In a column for [The Wall Street Journal](https://www.wsj.com/economy/central-banking/the-court-ruling-in-the-fed-chairs-favor-is-a-double-edged-sword-122f2d35?mod=e2tw), Nick Timiraos reflected on the Federal Reserve’s growing dependence on court orders as the president “press[es] to exert direct control over interest-rate decisions in any way possible.” In the past, the Fed’s “independence from the White House rested on an unwritten set of norms”; now, Trump is ignoring those norms, leading to major legal battles, including the case over Fed Governor Lisa Cook’s firing that’s now in front of the Supreme Court. A Supreme Court “ruling upholding Cook’s removal protections would reinforce the legal walls around the Fed. A ruling against her could give any president a direct lever over monetary policy that none has previously had,” Timiraos wrote.
On Site
[Justices will hear argument on Trump administration’s removal of protected status for Syrian and Haitian nationals](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/justices-will-hear-argument-on-trump-administrations-removal-of-protected-status-for-syrian-and-haitian-nationals/)
In a brief, unsigned order, the justices on Monday left in place rulings by federal judges in New York and Washington, D.C., that had indefinitely postponed the termination of the Temporary Protected Status program for Syrian and Haitian nationals. But the justices granted a pair of requests from the Trump administration to weigh in on the merits of the dispute over the administration’s efforts to end the TPS program for those nationals without waiting for federal appeals courts to do so first, as is the normal procedure.
[Haitian nationals ask court to deny Trump administration’s request to remove their protected status](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/haitian-nationals-ask-court-to-deny-trump-administrations-request-to-remove-their-protected-status/)
Before the court released its Monday order, a group of Haitian nationals urged the Supreme Court on Monday to leave in place a ruling by a federal judge in Washington, D.C., that allows them to stay in the United States for the time being because of unsafe conditions in their home country. In a 40-page filing, the Haitian nationals told the justices that they will “suffer irreparable—potentially fatal—injury” if that ruling is put on hold.
[A 95th birthday tribute to legendary SCOTUSblog reporter Lyle Denniston](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/a-95th-birthday-tribute-to-legendary-scotusblog-reporter-lyle-denniston/)
The inimitable Lyle Denniston, who served as the primary reporter for SCOTUSblog from 2004 until 2016, celebrated his 95th birthday on Monday. In honor of the occasion, Amy collected 10 of his best stories for SCOTUSblog – one for each decade of his life.
[Birthright citizenship: a response to Pete Patterson](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/birthright-citizenship-a-response-to-pete-patterson/)
In their Brothers in Law column, Akhil and Vikram Amar pushed back against a recent SCOTUSblog column by Pete Patterson, in which Patterson contended that the text of the 14th Amendment does not require granting automatic citizenship to babies born to temporary visitors to the U.S.
The Justices and Retirement
Like the flowering of the cherry blossoms, the question [arises virtually every year](https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/05/empirical-scotus-retirement-plan-blues/) at this time: Who will be the next justice to retire? This year, according to at least some of the [commentariat](https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/02/scotustoday-for-wednesday-february-18/#:~:text=Will%20Trump%20get%20a%20fourth%20Supreme%20Court%20justice%3F%20Speculation%20swirls%20around%20Alito), the most likely prospect is Justice Samuel Alito. So, we thought it’d be worthwhile to talk about what exactly happens when a justice leaves the bench.
Justices can [technically](https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/resignation-and-retirement-and-supreme-court) do so in one of three ways: retirement (including resignation), death, or removal following impeachment.
Although death used to be a more common way to leave the court, since 1954 there have been [only three justices](https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/resignation-and-retirement-and-supreme-court) who have died in office – Chief Justice William Rehnquist in 2005, Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016, and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 2020.
Only one justice has ever been impeached – and that impeachment resulted in [an acquittal](https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/12/scotustoday-for-friday-december-5/).
Which leaves us with retirement. Not until [1869](https://www.fjc.gov/history/spotlight-judicial-history/judicial-retirement), with the [Judiciary Act of 1869](https://legal-resources.uslegalforms.com/j/judiciary-act-of-1869), did Congress address pension benefits for Supreme Court justices, allowing them to retire with their full salary beginning at age 70 and with [at least 10](https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/resignation-and-retirement-and-supreme-court) years of judicial service. This proved popular: within four years of the legislation [four](https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/resignation-and-retirement-and-supreme-court) justices retired. The legislation evolved more than a few times, as noted by [Steve Vladeck](https://www.stevevladeck.com/p/54-the-politics-of-the-justices-pensions), but since 1937, “[a] retired justice can receive their full salary (and other forms of support, including an office and a law clerk) so long as they continue to ‘serve.’”
Although the majority of justices have retired due to age or ill health, some have “[resigned](https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/law/resignation-and-retirement-and-supreme-court)” from the court “because they were dissatisfied with some aspect of their work” (take Justice Thomas Johnson, who was unhappy with his circuit riding duties) or “to accept or seek another office” (see Chief Justice John Jay, who [left](https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/10/scotustoday-for-friday-october-31/#:~:text=In%201795%2C%20Jay%20resigned%20from%20the%20Supreme%20Court%20to%20serve%20as%20New%20York%E2%80%99s%20governor%2C%20where%20he%20signed%20a%201799%20act%20for%20the%20gradual%20abolition%20of%20slavery%20in%20the%20state.) the court after being elected New York’s governor).
Over the last 21 years, justices have retired for a variety of reasons.
Justice Sandra Day O’Connor [announced](https://www.scotusblog.com/2005/07/oconnor-retires/) her decision to retire on July 1, 2005, [writing](https://www.k-state.edu/landon/speakers/sandra-oconnor/#:~:text=In%20July%202005%20Sandra%20Day,as%20a%20Supreme%20Court%20Justice.) to President George W. Bush that she would retire as soon as her replacement was [nominated and confirmed](https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/oconnor070105.pdf) – a decision “[influenced by the decline in the health of her husband](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/ap-sandra-day-oconnor-fully-retired-from-public-life),” who had been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease.
Justice David Souter announced his retirement on May 1, 2009, in a very brief [letter](https://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/dhsletter-2.pdf) to President Barack Obama. Souter did not provide any explanation; as Lyle Denniston [described](https://www.scotusblog.com/2009/05/souter-announces-retirement/) for SCOTUSblog, “in a fashion that bespeaks Souter’s own character,” his letter “was terse, devoid of emotion and determinedly factual.”
On April 9, 2010, Justice John Paul Stevens [announced](https://www.scotusblog.com/2010/04/stevens-retiring/) his intent to retire, and [officially](https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/07/retired-justice-john-paul-stevens-has-died/) did so in late June. Stevens later [said](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/former-supreme-court-justice-john-paul-stevens-dies-at-99#:~:text=As%20he%20read%20parts%20of,trusted%20journalism%20and%20civil%20dialogue.) he [decided](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/26/us/politics/john-paul-stevens-memoir.html) to resign after suffering a mini-stroke when reading his dissent in the [Citizens United](https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/case-files/citizens-united-v-federal-election-commission/) case.
Justice Anthony Kennedy announced on [June 27, 2018](https://hls.harvard.edu/today/u-s-supreme-court-justice-anthony-kennedy-61-retire/), in a letter to President Donald Trump, that he would retire effective [July 31](https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/27/politics/anthony-kennedy-retires). According to Kennedy, he [was doing so](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/justice-kennedys-retirement-his-legacy-and-what-it-means-going-forward) to spend more time with his family, after over 30 years on the bench.
The most recent justice to leave the court, Justice Stephen Breyer, [announced](https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/01/stephen-breyer-pragmatic-liberal-will-retire-at-end-of-term/) his retirement in January 2022 ([following](https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/01/stephen-breyer-pragmatic-liberal-will-retire-at-end-of-term/) an “[extraordinary campaign](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/29/inside-campaign-pressure-justice-stephen-breyer-retire/)” from progressives urging him to leave the bench so that President Joe Biden could name his successor) and retired at the [end](https://www.scotusblog.com/category/retirement-of-stephen-breyer/) of the 2021-2022 term.
Although the justices would never say so, politics likely plays a role in retirement timing – [according to one study](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3000028/), if the incumbent president shares the party of the president who nominated the justice, and the incumbent president is in the initial two years of his four-year term, a justice has “odds of resignation” roughly [2.6](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3000028/) times higher than otherwise.
SCOTUS Quote
JUSTICE JACKSON: “Yes. As you might imagine, I would like to circle back to the concerns that the Chief Justice and Justice Kavanaugh raised about vacatur and the argument that you’re making in this case. And –”
JUSTICE KAGAN: “Seems to be a kind of D.C. Circuit cartel.”
— [United States v. Texas](https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/2022/22-58_4fc4.pdf) (2022)
[Kelsey DallasManaging Editor](/author/kelsey-dallas/)
Kelsey Dallas is SCOTUSblog's managing editor and the primary author of the SCOTUStoday newsletter.
[Nora CollinsEditorial Assistant](/author/nora-collins/)
Nora is an editorial assistant at SCOTUSblog, based in Washington, D.C.
Recommended Citation: Kelsey Dallas & Nora Collins, SCOTUStoday for Tuesday, March 17, SCOTUSblog (Mar. 17, 2026, 9:00 AM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/03/scotustoday-for-tuesday-march-17/