Mark Sherman, Associated Press

President-elect Donald Trump had called on the court to keep the ban on hold until after he takes office Monday.

Hearing arguments Friday, the justices seemed persuaded by arguments that the national security threat posed by the company’s connections to China override free speech concerns.

The justices said Wednesday they will hear arguments Jan. 10 about whether the law impermissibly restricts speech in violation of the First Amendment.

The justices’ decision, not expected for several months, could affect similar laws enacted by another 25 states and a range of other efforts to regulate the lives of transgender people, including which sports competitions they can join and which bathrooms they can use.

The justices returned the cases to lower courts for further review in broad challenges from trade associations representing the platforms.

In a historic ruling Monday, justices said for the first time that former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for their official acts and no immunity for unofficial acts.

The justices ruled 6-3 Friday the charge of obstructing an official proceeding must include proof that defendants tried to tamper with or destroy documents.

The court has upended a 40-year-old decision that made it easier for the federal government to regulate the environment, public health, workplace safety and consumer protections, a potentially lucrative victory for business interests.

The deal would have shielded Sackler family members who own the company from civil lawsuits over the toll of opioids but also would have provided billions of dollars to combat the epidemic.

The Supreme Court is putting the Environmental Protection Agency’s air pollution-fighting “good neighbor” plan on hold while legal challenges continue.

The justices in a 6-3 vote threw out lower-court rulings that favored Louisiana, Missouri and other parties in their claims that officials in the Democratic administration leaned on social media platforms to unconstitutionally squelch conservative points of view.

The court is stepping into the fight over transgender rights by agreeing to hear appeals from the Biden administration and families seeking to block state bans on gender-affirming care.

The justices ruled 8-1 Friday in favor of a 1994 ban on firearms for people under restraining orders to stay away from their spouses or partners.

The justices on Thursday upheld the government’s decision to deny a trademark to Steve Elster, who was seeking exclusive use of the phrase for T-shirts and other merchandise.

The justices ruled that abortion opponents lacked the legal right to sue over the federal approval of the medication, mifepristone, and subsequent actions to ease access to it.