US President Donald Trump is now one year into his second term.
In that time, a wide range of cases challenging his actions have landed on the Supreme Court's docket.
From the tariffs to immigration, troop deployment and birthright citizenship, here is a look at some of the major cases against the president that have made it to the nation's highest court.
Budget
Foreign aid cuts
As part of his "America First" agenda, Mr Trump cut about $US4 billion ($6 billion) in foreign aid that had been authorised by Congress for the fiscal year.
The Constitution gives Congress power over the federal purse strings.
Less than a month into his presidency, a federal judge ordered Mr Trump to pause his funding freeze, noting that the administration had not "offered any explanation" for a "blanket suspension" of all congressionally appropriated foreign aid.
In March, the Supreme Court decided to let the president withhold payment to foreign aid organisations for work they already performed, and in September, it allowed the president to continue withholding the $4 billion.
Freedom of Information documents obtained by the ABC showed the cuts left two Australian-backed aid projects in limbo.
Medical research
Early into Mr Trump's second term, the US government announced plans to cut $US4 billion ($5.96 billion) in grants for medical research related to racial minorities or the LGBTQIA+ community.
It was part of an effort to end diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives and transgender identities.
The case made its way to the Supreme Court, where the justices allowed the government to proceed with the sweeping cuts.
Teacher training grants
As part of the president's crackdown on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) initiatives, the Trump administration cut millions of dollars in teacher training grants.
The Department of Education found the grants violated Mr Trump's executive order that the government eliminate DEI programs.
When the federal government was taken to court over the move, a Massachusetts-based judge ruled that the administration had failed to follow correct legal procedure when it terminated the grants.
But the Supreme Court went on to block that ruling in what was the first win in the Supreme Court for Mr Trump during his second term.
Government departments and services
DOGE transparency
Early into the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) operation, 14 Democratic attorneys-general sued the Trump administration for its activities.
They alleged billionaire Elon Musk was violating the US Constitution by wielding powers only Senate-confirmed officials should possess.
In March, a federal judge ordered DOGE to turn over records related to its activities.
The documents would have revealed internal communications and the identities of staffers.
The Trump administration responded by filing an emergency appeal with the Supreme Court, requesting it put the order on hold.
The conservative justices decided to issue a block in May and extended it in June.
Its three liberal justices dissented.
Education
In March, the president signed an executive order aimed at dismantling the US Department of Education, fulfilling a campaign promise.
The order would leave school policy almost entirely in the hands of states and local boards.
It followed an announcement by the department that it would lay off almost half its staff.
District Judge Myong Joun ordered the government to reinstate nearly 1,400 of the workers affected by the mass lay-off.
He also blocked the administration from transferring key functions to other federal agencies.
The Supreme Court lifted those injunctions in July.
A legal challenge is continuing to play out.
Military ban for transgender people
The president signed an executive order barring transgender people from enlisting or serving in the military during his first days in office.
It led to the armed forces discharging thousands of troops and rejecting new recruits as the ensuing legal challenges played out.
US District Judge Benjamin Settle issued a nationwide order that blocked the military from carrying out Mr Trump's policy.
He found that the order likely violated service members' rights to equal protection under the Constitution.
But the Supreme Court went on to lift that injunction.
Passport gender markers
On his first day in office, Mr Trump signed an executive order that prevented transgender and non-binary people from choosing passport sex markers that aligned with their gender identity.
US District Judge Julia Kobick blocked the policy, ruling that it violated the Constitution's equal protection promise.
But in November, the Supreme Court overturned that decision, allowing the government to require passports to correspond only to a person's sex at birth while a class action lawsuit challenging the administration's action plays out.
Social security data
While the task force was still active, billionaire Elon Musk dispatched members of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to scrutinise sensitive personnel and payment information in government systems.
Workers were given access to millions of Americans' personal and financial data, such as their Social Security numbers.
A coalition of mostly Democrat-led states sued the Trump administration, arguing DOGE had no legal power to access the Treasury's systems.
A judge issued an emergency block, but the Supreme Court overrode that order in June, giving workers broad access to the personal information of Americans in the Social Security Administration data systems.
Government employees
Copyright Office
Shira Perlmutter, the US Copyright Office director and register of copyrights, was fired by order of the Trump administration on May 10.
Ms Perlmutter and her office had issued a lengthy report that was critical of arguments made by AI development firms, including Elon Musk's xAI, that artificial intelligence using copyright material to train generative content might fall under fair use protections.
On November 26, the Supreme Court postponed a decision on whether to allow the Trump administration to remove Ms Perlmutter, leaving her in place as the government's top copyright official as her legal challenge continued.
Consumer product safety commissioners
On July 23, the Supreme Court allowed Mr Trump to remove three Democratic members of the government's top consumer product safety watchdog.
The decision boosted his power over federal agencies set up by Congress to be independent of presidential control.
Federal Reserve
On January 21, local time, the Supreme Court justices will hear arguments over Mr Trump's attempt to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook from office as he challenges the central bank's independence.
It was the first-ever bid by a president to fire a Federal Reserve official.
A judge in a lower court has temporarily blocked the Trump administration from doing so, and the Supreme Court declined to immediately decide a Department of Justice request to put the order on hold.
When Congress created the central bank in 1913, it passed a law called the Federal Reserve Act, which included provisions to shield it from political interference.
The law stipulates presidents can only remove governors "for cause", though it does not spell out the terms or procedures for doing so.
Mr Trump has accused Ms Cook of committing mortgage fraud before taking office — a claim that she denies.
Federal Trade Commission
In March, Mr Trump dismissed Rebecca Slaughter from her role as a Democratic member of the Federal Trade Commission.
The Supreme Court heard arguments on December 8 after the Department of Justice appealed a lower court's decision that the president had exceeded his authority.
The Trump administration argued that tenure protections given to the heads of independent agencies unlawfully encroached on presidential power under the US Constitution.
Its conservative justices signalled they would overturn the court ruling.
That would give a historic boost to presidential power and imperil a 90-year-old legal precedent.
A ruling is expected by the end of June, but the court has let Mr Trump remove Ms Slaughter from her position while the case plays out.
Probationary employees
On March 13, federal judge William Alsup ordered six federal agencies to rehire thousands of probationary employees while litigation continued.
Less than a month later, the Supreme Court blocked that order.
Mass lay-offs
Under billionaire Elon Musk's direction, the now-defunct Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) set out to massively curb spending within the federal government.
That included pursuing mass government job cuts and downsizing numerous agencies.
The department was quickly met with lawsuits challenging its activity, and in May, District Judge Susan Illston blocked such large-scale lay-offs as litigation in the case proceeded.
The Supreme Court lifted that order in July, clearing the way for the administration to continue pursuing mass job cuts.
Immigration
The Alien Enemies Act
The Trump administration has tried to invoke a centuries-old wartime law to justify deporting Venezuelan immigrants to a mega prison in El Salvador.
The Alien Enemies Act was created to prevent foreign espionage.
The administration alleged that the Venezuelans it arrested were members of the Tren de Aragua criminal gang.
In April, the Supreme Court placed limits on how deportations under the wartime law might occur, even as the legality of using that law for this purpose at all was still being contested.
It faulted the government for seeking to deport the Venezuelans without adequate due process.
Birthright citizenship
In the US, citizenship is automatically granted to people who are born in the country's territory, according to a clause in the Constitution.
But upon returning to office, Mr Trump issued an executive order instructing the federal government not to recognise those rights.
The same day, 22 states challenged that order in court.
Several federal judges blocked the order from taking effect in states across the country, ruling that the Trump administration was violating the Constitution's 14th Amendment, as well as a federal law that codified birthright.
But the Trump administration appealed those injunctions, arguing that lower courts should not be able to block nationwide policies.
The Supreme Court has agreed to decide the legality of Mr Trump's executive order, but no date has been set for arguments in the case.
ICE raids
As part of Mr Trump's plan to ramp up deportations, federal immigration agents have undertaken raids to arrest people they allege are in the country illegally.
Witnesses say people have been targeted for deportation based on their race or language.
Those reports led to a legal challenge and a judge ruling on July 11 that the administration's actions likely violated the US Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.
District Judge Maame Frimpong temporarily barred agents from stopping or detaining people without "reasonable suspicion" that they are in the country illegally.
But on September 8, the Supreme Court put that block on hold, backing the Trump administration's hardline immigration policy.
Immigration 'parole'
At the start of Mr Trump's second term, hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian, and Nicaraguan migrants were in the US on immigration "parole" granted by former president Joe Biden.
The temporary legal status allowed urgent entry into the country for "urgent humanitarian reasons".
The Trump administration stripped more than 10,000 immigrants, who were on parole as part of a family reunification program, of their status.
The change exposed many to rapid removal from the US.
District Judge Indira Talwani blocked the government from revoking the immigration parole of these immigrants as a legal challenge played out, but her decision was overruled by the Supreme Court.
National Guard deployments
To protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers as they carried out raids in several Democrat-run cities, Mr Trump seized control of states' National Guard units and deployed troops on the ground.
Critics argued it was part of an effort to punish adversaries and stifle dissent.
When the president turned his sights on Chicago, the city and state of Illinois launched a legal challenge to block the move.
US District Judge April Perry issued an order prohibiting the deployment of hundreds of National Guard troops, and on December 23, the Supreme Court refused and let that order stand.
Protected statuses
Immigrants from certain countries determined by the US government are eligible for temporary protected status (TPS).
That allows them to live in, and in some cases, work in the US for a limited amount of time.
During his term, former president Joe Biden granted TPS to hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans in the US.
But Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced in February that the designation would end on April 7, 2025, about 18 months early.
The National TPS Alliance filed a lawsuit challenging the change, and US District Judge Edward Chen ruled that Ms Noem lacked the authority to end the TPS.
But on October 3, the Supreme Court again cleared the way for the protection to be revoked, granting the administration's request to put the lower court's ruling on hold.
Third country deportations
Under the Immigration and Nationality Act, the Department of Homeland Security can deport immigrants to countries they have no ties to — locations known as "third countries".
Nearly a dozen countries have reportedly agreed to receive deportees from the US, even if they have no citizenship or nationality there.
Those countries include El Salvador, South Sudan and Rwanda.
Boston-based US District Judge Brian Murphy found the administration's policy probably violated due process requirements under the Constitution.
He issued a preliminary injunction that aimed to ensure immigrants had enough time to raise claims they might be persecuted, tortured or killed before being deported to a third country.
It blocked thousands of pending deportation orders.
But the Supreme Court paused that injunction in June in a ruling that Justice Murphy noted said little about the reasons why it was staying his ruling.
Soon after, South Sudan took in eight deportees who were at the centre of the legal challenge.
The country was the poorest in the world as of November in terms of GDP per capita.
Wrongful deportation
In April, the Supreme Court directed the Trump administration to facilitate the return of a Salvadoran man to the US, who the government admitted was deported in error.
Kilmar Ábrego García fled to the US as a teenager to escape gang violence and extortion in El Salvador.
In 2019, he was granted protection from being deported to El Salvador because he faced legitimate fear of persecution there.
But immigration officials ignored that ruling and sent the 29-year-old father to a Salvadoran mega prison in March.
A district judge ordered the government to "facilitate and effectuate" the return of Mr García, and the Supreme Court upheld that direction.
US Attorney-General Pam Bondi announced on June 6 that Mr García had been flown back to the US and would face criminal charges of transporting illegal immigrants.
Mr García pleaded not guilty.
The Department of Homeland Security has announced plans to re-deport him to Uganda.
Trade
Tariffs
The president had invoked a 1977 law known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which is meant for use during national emergencies, to argue he had powers to impose sweeping tariffs on foreign countries.
Businesses and 12 US states challenged the claim.
Lower courts ruled that Mr Trump overreached, and the case eventually arrived before the Supreme Court.
Conservative and liberal justices alike questioned the Trump administration's legal representation over whether the law gave the president such powers.
They also examined whether Mr Trump had intruded on the powers of Congress by implementing the taxes.
But some conservative justices also stressed the inherent authority of presidents when dealing with foreign countries, suggesting the court could be sharply divided on the case.
A ruling is expected by the end of June.
ABC/Reuters
