How often does the Trump administration use the Supreme Court’s “shadow” (emergency) docket?
Critical Analysis
Find answers to the following questions using the visual above, any links below, your big brain, and your knowledge of American government and politics:
The Supreme Court docket is a public record, maintained by the clerk of the court, that chronologically lists all filings and rulings for cases before the Court, including briefs, motions, and orders. The Supreme Court uses two kinds of dockets: the emergency docket (also known as the shadow docket) and the merits docket. Each term the Court decides some 60 to 70 cases on the merits docket. Before rendering a ruling in each one, the Court considers numerous briefs and holds oral argument. It then issues a decision with a lengthy opinion explaining its reasoning, often with concurrences and dissents. The process supports both informed decision-making and transparency. Almost every Supreme Court case you can name — Brown v. Board of Education, Roe v. Wade, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission — was decided on the merits docket. According to the visual above, in the combined 16 years that they were president, how many total times did George W. Bush and Barack Obama use the emergency docket?
The "shadow docket" (also known as the emergency docket) refers to a type of Supreme Court case that requires a quick decision about whether a policy can proceed or must wait while lower judges debate its legality. These cases are decided quickly, often without oral arguments, detailed explanations, or signed opinions from the justices. Shadow docket cases differ from the merits docket where cases are deliberated and decided carefully with detailed explanation. According to the visual above, how many times has Trump used the emergency docket between January 20, 2025 and July 9, 2025?
According to the visual above, describe the difference in the Trump administration’s use of the shadow docket compared to all other presidencies before him?
The Supreme Court is operating these days on two tracks. One of those tracks, is the merits docket. where people ask the Supreme Court to hear a case. If it does, it hears oral arguments and reads briefs of arguments from each side, the justices meet, vote, deliberate, exchange drafts, and then about 60 times a year, they issue long, involved considered decisions, majority opinions, dissenting opinions, often a hundred pages or more. Now at the same time, on a separate track, there’s the so-called shadow docket or the emergency docket which happens really fast. Parties race to the court. They submit only very thin briefs. There’s no oral argument. And in a matter of weeks, the court issues orders, deciding consequential matters in a very short opinion with little or no reasoning. The second Trump administration has run to the Supreme Court - where 6 of the 9 members are Republican appointees - 24 times since January. Why do you think Trump uses the shadow docket so frequently?
The subject matter of the cases heard on the shadow docket is really consequential. And the Supreme Court has greenlighted immigration stops in LA, canceling NIH grants, firing thousands of federal workers, discharging transgender service members. It’s essentially the entire Trump agenda. The Trump administration filed 41 emergency applications with the Supreme Court during Trump's first four years in office. By contrast, the Bush and Obama administrations collectively filed only eight applications over 16 years. From the inauguration in January 2025 until the summer recess, the administration filed 19 emergency requests, the same number the Biden administration filed in its entire four-year term. According to a July 2025 article in The Hill, Trump's administration had successfully halted lower court orders in nearly all of its decided emergency appeals - 84 percent of the time. Why do you think that Trump, who loses cases in lower courts 93% of the time, usually wins in the Supreme Court’s shadow docket?
In a recent case before the federal courts there was a challenge to the immigration crackdown in the Los Angeles area, where masked ICE agents were stopping, detaining lots of people based on their ethnicity. And challengers said that violated the Fourth Amendment, that it was indiscriminate racial profiling, and they persuaded a federal trial judge to issue an injunction that says, we’re not saying you can’t enforce the immigration laws, but saying you can’t rely on certain factors alone or in combination. And the Trump administration didn’t like those restrictions. They go to the appeals court, the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit won’t pause it. And they go to the Supreme Court. And the Supreme Court rules for the administration in a decision that contains precisely zero reasoning. The Supreme Court is basically free to make up whatever structure or format it wants to issue rulings. Do you think the increased use of a system that lacks transparency and reasoning will hurt the Court’s public approval?
Critics argue that the Shadow Docket process is an "exercise of power, not reason". There are concerns about the lack of transparency, as there is no signed opinion for legal scholars to examine, and no single justice is personally associated with the decision. Do you support the use of the shadow docket?
How does the shadow docket illustrate the concept of checks and balances?
Most orders from the shadow docket, such as due dates for briefs, have little importance to anyone beyond the litigating parties. However, other shadow docket matters, such as requests to halt a lower court’s orders, can have high stakes. The Court might, for example, reinstate a law after a lower court had stopped its implementation. Cases on the shadow docket, in contrast to those on the merits docket, typically do not receive extensive briefing or a hearing. The decisions are accompanied by little to no explanation and often lack clarity on which justices are in the majority or minority. They are sometimes released in the middle of the night, creating a sense of palace intrigue. How is the shadow docket different from the docket we normally hear about?
Members of the Supreme Court are not elected and cannot be removed from office directly. Does the shadow docket increase or decrease American democracy?
Write and Discuss
Take ten minutes to write about the question at the top of the page and then discuss with your classmates.
Act on your Learning
Contact your U.S. Senators and share your opinion of the shadow docket, and ask them their opinion on the shadow docket.
Get Creative
I asked AI to write a dialogue about the shadow docket between Chief Justice John Roberts and Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson.
Justice John Roberts: Dwayne, it's a pleasure to finally meet you. I've been a fan of your work for years.
The Rock: The pleasure's all mine, Justice Roberts. Always great to meet a fellow leader, someone who lays down the law. Speaking of which, I've been hearing a lot about this "shadow docket" you've got going on at the Supreme Court. Sounds a bit… mysterious, like something out of a superhero movie. Is it where the Court makes its secret moves?
Justice John Roberts: [chuckles slightly] Not quite so dramatic, Dwayne. The "shadow docket" refers to a type of Supreme Court case that requires a quick decision about whether a policy can proceed or must wait while lower judges debate its legality. These cases are decided quickly, often without oral arguments, detailed explanations, or signed opinions from the justices.
The Rock: So, it's like a fast-track, no-frills kind of ruling? Less pomp and circumstance, more… immediate impact.
Justice John Roberts: Precisely. Unlike our merits docket, where cases are deliberated and decided carefully with detailed explanation, these emergency applications require a snap decision. The rulings are made within weeks, and often, the justices don't explain their rationale. The unsigned orders can sometimes be a single paragraph about procedural mechanics.
The Rock: Huh. So, you're saying these quick decisions have a big impact? I've seen some headlines about it affecting things like voting rights, climate change, and even immigration. That's some heavy lifting for a "shadow."
Justice John Roberts: Indeed. Shadow-docket rulings have influenced policy on issues such as those you mentioned. The first half of 2025, for example, saw a record high of 15 emergency applications accepted. It has become a much larger part of the Supreme Court's work in recent years.
The Rock: So, it's grown a lot. But if there's no detailed explanation, and no one's really putting their name on it, how do people know why you're making these calls? Seems like that could lead to some… flexes bicep …unrest.
Justice John Roberts: You've hit on a significant point of concern. Critics argue that this process is an "exercise of power, not reason". There are concerns about the lack of transparency, as there is no signed opinion for legal scholars to examine, and no single justice is personally associated with the decision. This can leave lower-court judges unsure about the Supreme Court's reasoning.
The Rock: So, it's like a judge is laying down a ruling, but they're doing it from behind a curtain. No accountability, no clear roadmap for the next guy who has to deal with a similar issue. In the wrestling ring, if you make a move, you own it. The crowd knows who delivered the People's Elbow.
Justice John Roberts: [nods gravely] Justice Kagan, in a 2021 dissent, lamented a midnight ruling that effectively overturned Roe v. Wade in Texas, calling it "emblematic of too much of this court's shadow-docket decision making — which every day becomes more unreasoned, inconsistent and impossible to defend". Justice Breyer has also stated, "I can't say never decide a shadow-docket thing. … But be careful". The sentiment is that courts in a democracy owe the public more transparency.
The Rock: Sounds like a lot of legal heavyweights are saying the same thing. So, what's the plan to shine a spotlight on this "shadow"? Because if the people don't understand the rules, and the reasons behind them, that's not a strong foundation. You know, like building a house without solid concrete.
Justice John Roberts: It's a complex issue, Dwayne, with arguments for both the necessity of quick decisions in urgent cases and the need for greater transparency and explanation. We are constantly evaluating our processes, and the discussions around the shadow docket are very much a part of that ongoing conversation. Your analogy of the strong foundation is apt; public trust in the integrity of the court is paramount.
The Rock: Well, Justice, I appreciate you breaking it down for me. You guys have a tough job, trying to keep the country on track. Just remember, the people need to see the work, understand the why. That's how you build true strength. Now, if you'll excuse me, I've got some iron to pump. Maybe I'll start calling my quick workout decisions the "gym docket."
Justice John Roberts: [smiling] I like that, Dwayne. The "gym docket." Thank you for your candor. It's always valuable to hear different perspectives..
Write your own shadow docket dialogue between two celebrities, or simply ask AI to do it for you.
Learning Extension
Listen to this Daily podcast about the Trump Administration’s use of the Shadow Docket.
Like today’s government lesson? Subscribe for access to a searchable archive of over 1000 lessons. Join now and the first month is free!
Over 1000 amazing civics and AP Government lessons tagged and searchable by topic; plus activities, games, reviews, and more. Cancel at any time. Use promo code SIGNMEUP at checkout to get the first month of our monthly subscription for free!