The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear three separate cases involving student speech, government surveillance, and firearm liability. The Court turned away a free speech dispute involving an Indiana high school’s refusal to allow a student-led anti-abortion group to hang flyers featuring the message “Defund Planned Parenthood.” The case originated in 2021 when a student launched a chapter of Students for Life of America at Noblesville High School. The school allowed student clubs to post flyers in common areas but required administrator approval and prohibited content deemed “political” or “disruptive.” The school denied the student’s request to post posters featuring photos of students holding signs with the “Defund Planned Parenthood” message. A lower court had sided with the school, finding the flyers could be perceived as bearing the school’s imprimatur. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit upheld that decision, stating the school had the authority to restrict political content on its walls to maintain neutrality. Justice Samuel Alito dissented from the Supreme Court’s decision, suggesting the court should clarify the relationship between a 1988 decision regarding school-sponsored activities and other government-speech decisions. The Court also rejected former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page’s attempt to revive a lawsuit against former FBI Director James Comey and other officials regarding surveillance warrants obtained during the 2016 Russian interference investigation. The lawsuit alleged that the FBI made “significant errors and omissions” in warrant applications, including reliance on the “Steele dossier.” While the Trump administration reached a $1.25 million settlement with Page in April regarding his claims against the U.S. Government, the lawsuit against the individual officials remained. A federal judge and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia had previously dismissed the suit, citing the statute of limitations. Finally, the Supreme Court declined to intervene in a challenge to a New York law that provides a legal pathway to hold gunmakers accountable for harm caused by their weapons. The 2021 law was designed to circumvent a 2005 federal liability shield for gun manufacturers. Gunmakers, including Glock and Smith & Wesson, argued the state statute exploits a loophole in federal law. A federal judge and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had previously ruled against the gunmakers.