Toggle navigation
Blog
Challenges
Sign In
Sign Up
Challenges
Questions
Filters
Status
Active
Coming Soon
Completed
Active
Pending Resolution
Resolved
Suspended
Type
Forecasting Questions
All
Forecasting Questions
Discussion Questions
Sort By
Start Date
End Date
Number of Forecasts
Number of Forecasters
Alphabetically
Filter By
Featured Questions
Challenges
Select All
Not Part of a Challenge
(5)
only
2025-26 Red Carpet Cha... (12)
only
2025-26 'Sportsball' C... (29)
only
2025 University Foreca... (7)
only
2025 World Elections C... (4)
only
2026-27 'Sportsball' C... (23)
only
2026 World Elections C... (20)
only
A Challenge of Interest! (25)
only
Foxes Ask (55)
only
International Trade Ch... (18)
only
In the News 2025 (178)
only
In the News 2026 (286)
only
Middle East in Focus 2025 (20)
only
"Right!" said FRED: Q1... (14)
only
"Right!" said FRED: Q4... (13)
only
Russia-Ukraine Conflic... (8)
only
Second Term, First Yea... (26)
only
Superforecasting® Work... (17)
only
The Economist: 2025-26... (15)
only
The Economist: The Wor... (15)
only
The Final Countdown: A... (7)
only
Vehicle Innovation Cha... (16)
only
Xi Jinping's China in ... (9)
only
Show less
Tags
Select All
No Tags
only
US Policy (15)
only
Society (13)
only
US Politics (11)
only
Elections and Referenda (3)
only
Business (2)
only
Economic Policy (2)
only
Foreign Policy (2)
only
Sports (2)
only
Leader Entry/Exit (1)
only
Non-US Politics (1)
only
Show more
Question
The Economist
asks:
In US v. Hemani, will the Supreme Court rule that the federal prohibition against unlawful users or addicts of any controlled substance from possessing firearms violates the Second Amendment as applied to Hemani?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
22
·
31
The Economist
asks:
In Wolford v. Lopez, will the Supreme Court rule that the Ninth Circuit erred in holding that Hawaii may presumptively prohibit licensed firearm permit holders from carrying firearms onto private property open to the public unless the property owner has given express permission?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
24
·
33
The Economist
asks:
In Little v. Hecox, will the Supreme Court rule that the district court abused its discretion or otherwise erred in issuing a preliminary injunction against enforcement of Idaho's Fairness in Women's Sports Act as applied to Hecox?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
17
·
29
The Economist
asks:
In Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety, will the Supreme Court rule that Damon Landor may sue a government official in his individual capacity for damages for violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA)?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
38
·
81
The Economist
asks:
In Bost v. Illinois State Board of Elections, will the Supreme Court rule that the petitioners have standing to challenge the state's laws allowing ballots to be received and counted after an election day?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
36
·
49
The Economist
asks:
In Hamm v. Smith, will the Supreme Court rule that lower courts erred in vacating Defendant Joseph Clifton Smith's death sentence because the district court found him to be intellectually disabled?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
24
·
40
The Economist
asks:
In Case v. Montana, will the Supreme Court rule that police violated Petitioner William Case's Fourth Amendment rights by entering his home without probable cause that an emergency was occurring?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
24
·
45
The Economist
asks:
In First Choice Women's Resource Centers (First Choice) v. Platkin, will the Supreme Court rule that a federal court has jurisdiction to hear First Choice's claim that New Jersey's subpoena implicates First Choice's First Amendment rights?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
20
·
34
The Economist
asks:
In Chiles v. Salazar, will the Supreme Court rule that Colorado's law prohibiting mental health professionals from providing "conversion therapy" to minor clients violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment as to communications between counselors and clients?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
35
·
56
The Economist
asks:
In National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) v. Federal Election Commission (FEC), will the Supreme Court rule that limits on coordinated party expenditures in 52 U.S.C. § 30116 violate the First Amendment, either on their face or as applied to party spending in connection with "party coordinated communications"?
Closing
Jul 01, 2026 07:01AM UTC
·
21
·
38
1
2
Next ›
Last »
Files
Remove
Tip: Mention someone by typing @username
Publish Anonymously
Cancel