OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Supreme Court Opens New Term With Major Cases on Guns Immigration and Climate

13 sources · updated 2026-10-06
Left 0% Center 50% Right 50%
0 left · 1 center · 1 right

What happened

The U.S. Supreme Court opened its new term on October 5 with about 30 cases on the merits docket, roughly half a typical caseload. The first argument was Suncor Energy Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, in which energy companies seek to stop Colorado localities from pursuing climate-damage claims in state court; Justice Samuel Alito recused. Accepted cases also include Viramontes v. Cook County on state bans of AR-15-style rifles, Department of Homeland Security v. D.V.D. on third-country deportations, and Rhoney v. Barbosa da Cunha on mandatory detention of certain immigrants without bond. Later arguments address Arizona proof-of-citizenship voter-registration rules and a Colorado Catholic preschool’s exclusion from a state-funded program. The Court can still add cases to the docket.
Sourcing check · Partly on the record · 3 articles

1 of 3 articles cite a named source for the story. It was on the record from the first report.

What these terms mean and how they're counted
On the record · names a source 1 of 3
On the record means the article cites a source by name for the story's main claim: a person, or an institution speaking officially, such as a company statement or a named agency's spokesperson. The opposite is an unnamed source. The count is how many of the counted articles cite at least one such source; the names are everyone named across them, each once however the articles spell it. Here: Jan Crawford
Primary evidence · cites a document or data 0 of 3
Primary evidence means the article cites a record you could check yourself: a court filing or ruling, a dataset or report, a recording or transcript, an official statement or press release, market data. A quote is not a document. The count is how many articles cite one. Here: None cited.
Credits another outlet 0 of 3
The article says the story comes from another outlet's reporting (“first reported by Reuters”). Those articles relay the story; they are not independent confirmation. Here: Each article presents its own reporting.
Unnamed sources 0 of 3
The main claim is attributed to people who are not identified: “people familiar with the matter”, “officials said”. The count is how many articles do this.
How it developed
When the first report landed and whether it named anyone; when the first named source and the first document appeared. Here: First report Oct 5, 22:27 UTC by CBS News, naming its source.
Not counted 0
Opinion, analysis and video pieces, and articles too short to assess. Every count above is out of the counted articles. An article republished under a new headline is one article.
This is about who is cited, not whether the story is true. Each source below says what it names. How we count
ONE-SIDED THIS WEEK. Only left-leaning outlets have covered this story in the last two days; Fox News reported it on 2026-10-05.
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

Right-leaning outlets had not covered the Supreme Court's new term as of publication. Left-leaning coverage reports the justices opening with a climate case in which energy companies seek to stop local damage suits, with challenges to state AR-15 bans and two Trump immigration policies also on the docket. A reader of the silent side misses that entire slate, including deportations to third countries the Court has already allowed to continue and a fight over detention without a bond hearing. Left-leaning coverage splits its lead between a straight case list and a political frame. The political frame shows up as a "new wave of Trump cases" in one ABC News piece timed to the midterms, and as a strained tie to the president in The Hill. The ABC News write-ups also skip that the Court has so far accepted only about half its usual caseload. Why is this term's merits docket so much thinner than usual?
Bottom line

A reader who saw only right-leaning outlets would not know ABC News reported billions of dollars hanging on the climate case that opens the new Supreme Court term.

The receipts — 2 facts one side's coverage lacks
  • The Trump administration is backing the energy companies and calls the climate suits a power grab to impose emissions rules official statementin ABC News · absent from right-leaning coverage
  • Billions of dollars are potentially at stake in the Boulder climate lawsuit numberin ABC News · absent from right-leaning coverage
The Left View
Outlets covering the term (ABC News, The Hill, Washington Post, Bloomberg, New York Times, Axios, CBS News, Christian Science Monitor) report the docket’s lead items as climate litigation by Boulder County against Suncor and ExxonMobil, Second Amendment challenges to assault-weapon bans, Trump administration immigration policies on third-country removals and no-bond detention, Arizona voting rules, and religious-school participation in Colorado’s preschool program. Several left-leaning reports frame the term around a tense Court–Trump relationship, near-record-low public approval, possible midterm-related disputes, and whether the 6-3 conservative majority will check or defer to the administration. Center reports emphasize the lighter caseload, specific legal questions, split lower-court rulings, and that emergency-docket orders lack the precedential weight of merits decisions.
Our Take (balanced)
The story is substantive: it rests on the Court’s published docket, named parties (Suncor, ExxonMobil, Boulder County, DHS, Barbosa da Cunha), recusal notice, and scheduled argument dates, not on a single uncorroborated claim. Established facts are which cases have been granted and that arguments have begun; how the justices will rule, the durability of any Trump–Court friction, and polling on public approval are not yet outcomes. No right-leaning outlet has reported this. Watch for remaining oral arguments, written opinions, any further grants of certiorari, and party or Court statements.

13 sources

More stories

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.