GUEST BLOG POST: SCOTUS Term Begins: What’s on the K-12 Docket?

Guest post written by Sonja Trainor, Executive Director of the National School Attorneys Association   

As the Supreme Court kicks off its October 2026 term (“OT2026”)—the fourth for this particular group of justices—it’s anyone’s guess whether this will be another blockbuster year for K-12 education. But the potential is certainly there. Here’s what we know, what we don’t know yet, and what we’re watching. 

The Court’s last two terms delivered blockbuster decisions on parental rights. OT2026 has more potentially significant parental-rights cases in the pipeline, although only one has been accepted for review so far. In International Partners for Ethical Care, Inc. v. Ferguson, the Court will consider whether parents have the legal right to challenge a Washington state law designed to allow runaway minors to access gender-affirming treatment without parental notice or consent. If the Court rules that parents may bring such lawsuits, it could open the door to additional challenges to school policies. 

The Court will also decide whether Colorado may exclude a Catholic preschool from a state funding program because of its faith-based admissions policy excluding LGBTQ+ families.  Whether private schools accepting public funds must comply with state nondiscrimination laws has been an open question for years. St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy will be argued November 3. 

Another case asks whether school employees can sue their employers under Title IX for sex-based employment discrimination unrelated to advocacy for students. In Crowther v. Board of Regents, University System of Georgia, public university employees allege that their employers disciplined them based on sex.   

NSAA, joined by AASA and other national education organizations, filed an amicus brief supporting the public university employers. Written by former Solicitor General Greg Garre and a team at Latham & Watkins, the brief explains that Congress created a carefully calibrated system for employment discrimination claims under Title VII. Creating a parallel right to sue under Title IX, the brief argues, would impose substantial burdens on public school districts by allowing longer and more expensive litigation. Crowther will be argued November 30. 

In the coming weeks, we should learn whether the Court will take up one potential blockbuster (probably!) and several sleeper cases that could have significant consequences for public schools. 

Most Court-watchers expect the justices to accept Nathan v. Alamo Heights Independent School District, which challenges a Texas law requiring public schools to display a state-prescribed version of the Ten Commandments in every classroom. The case raises important questions about the First Amendment’s prohibition against government establishment of religion. In a sharp reversal, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc (with all active judges participating), overturned an earlier panel decision that had relied on longstanding Supreme Court precedent to block the law. The full Fifth Circuit concluded that the statute did not substantially burden students’ or parents’ rights to freely exercise religion. Whether the Supreme Court agrees—and what that might mean for religion in public schools—could be one of the term’s biggest education stories. 

The jury is still out on several other petitions raising intriguing questions: 

Some of these cases may never make it onto the Court’s argument calendar. Others could produce decisions with far-reaching implications for school districts, employees, students, and families. 

One thing is certain: Whether the justices take on the blockbuster cases or surprise us with a sleeper, the Supreme Court will continue to shape the rules for America’s public schools. NSAA will be watching—and keeping school attorneys informed every step of the way.