The Supreme Court will return from its summer recess in October and hear legal battles involving ghost guns, veteran disability claims and water pollution in the justices’ first sitting of the new term.

On Friday, the court released its October calendar, which includes four notable disputes:

Ghost guns

---

---

On Oct. 8, the justices will take up a dispute over ghost guns — firearms that can be assembled and lack serial numbers. It will be the second day for the justices after they return from a three-month recess to kick off the 2024-25 term.

The Biden administration asked the justices to review a case in which a federal appeals court struck down a regulation governing the sale of kits to make ghost guns, saying it stretched the definition of “firearm” found in the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Justice Department lawyers say ghost guns have turned into an end-run around federal gun control laws, allowing “anyone with access to the internet to anonymously buy a parts kit or partially complete frame or receiver that can be assembled into a working firearm in as little as 20 minutes.”

Gun rights advocates say if the government wants to regulate the sale of ghost guns, it must pass a new law, arguing the feds can’t stretch the 1968 legislation that far.

Veteran disability claims

On Oct. 16, the justices will review a legal battle brought by veterans who say they deserve the benefit of the doubt over the government when their disability claims are considered a close call.

Joshua Bufkin and Norman Thornton argued through their lawyers that when the Veterans Court was established, it was directed to give former service members — not the government — that benefit.

Water pollution

Also on Oct. 16, the justices will grapple with San Francisco’s challenge to the Environmental Protection Agency over guidelines for water pollutant limits.

The city argued in its filing that the Clean Water Act requires the EPA and states to provide specific pollutant limits for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit holders.

The city’s petition noted that the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has held that the Clean Water Act requires the EPA to set specific limits for surface water quality standards, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that the EPA had to issue permits with only generic standards that say not “too much” pollution.  

The circuit split invited the high court to settle that dispute.

Although the cases will all be argued in October, rulings from the justices are not expected to be issued right away.

The court generally takes months to issue an opinion and usually wraps up the term by June.