Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for Supreme Court Announcements/Decisions

Channel

Supreme Court Announcements/Decisions

@TheSCOTUSFocus

On this record: Topic · Observations · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

5,842subscribers

-38 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001691268900
TypeChannel
Username@TheSCOTUSFocus
CreatedBetween 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live10 November 2026
Measurements held25
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 10 November 2026
On Telegramt.me/TheSCOTUSFocus

Topic

Politics & activism — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 52% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.

Observations

These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.

Views per post sit far above this size band

5,250 average views per post against 5,846 subscribers — an engagement rate of 89.7%. Across the 4,128 registered channels in the same cohort — 3,186–9,999 subscribers, posting mainly in English — the middle half sit between 2.99% and 17.7%, with a median of 7.76%.

What this was computed from
Window30 days (6 October 2026 – 5 November 2026)
Posts measured10 of 10 published in the window (0 exact, 10 rounded by Telegram)
Views totalled52,460
Mature posts only95.8% over 9 posts read at least 24h after publication
Subscribers5,846 measured 4 November 2026
Cohortb3162:eng · 4,128 channels · p10 0.941% · p25 2.99% · p50 7.76% · p75 17.7% · p90 30.3%
Position in cohort99.176th percentile · 11.6× the cohort median
Uncertainty±0.017% of the figure, from Telegram’s rounding
Post languageEnglish · 100.0% of the window’s posts

When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.

This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal. A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.

Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 5 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.

Growth

5,8385,8805,8597 August 2026 — 5,880 subscribers7 August 2026 — 5,880 subscribers11 August 2026 — 5,878 subscribers14 August 2026 — 5,875 subscribers17 August 2026 — 5,865 subscribers20 August 2026 — 5,856 subscribers24 August 2026 — 5,864 subscribers27 August 2026 — 5,874 subscribers30 August 2026 — 5,869 subscribers2 September 2026 — 5,868 subscribers6 September 2026 — 5,867 subscribers11 September 2026 — 5,874 subscribers15 September 2026 — 5,868 subscribers19 September 2026 — 5,873 subscribers28 September 2026 — 5,860 subscribers5 October 2026 — 5,872 subscribers15 October 2026 — 5,868 subscribers18 October 2026 — 5,865 subscribers20 October 2026 — 5,863 subscribers24 October 2026 — 5,852 subscribers29 October 2026 — 5,847 subscribers1 November 2026 — 5,838 subscribers4 November 2026 — 5,846 subscribers7 November 2026 — 5,847 subscribers10 November 2026 — 5,842 subscribers5,8427 August 202610 November 2026
25 measurements spanning 95 days, net -38. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 5,832–5,886 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 25
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
10 Nov 2026, 20:315,842-5
7 Nov 2026, 08:465,847+1
4 Nov 2026, 14:375,846+8
1 Nov 2026, 17:275,838-9
29 Oct 2026, 22:565,847-5
24 Oct 2026, 08:565,852-11
20 Oct 2026, 22:395,863-2
18 Oct 2026, 04:515,865-3
15 Oct 2026, 14:195,868-4
5 Oct 2026, 18:595,872+12
28 Sept 2026, 17:015,860-13
19 Sept 2026, 09:565,873+5
15 Sept 2026, 03:015,868-6
11 Sept 2026, 17:005,874+7
6 Sept 2026, 16:385,867-1
2 Sept 2026, 06:235,868-1
30 Aug 2026, 03:175,869-5
27 Aug 2026, 04:085,874+10
24 Aug 2026, 04:445,864+8
20 Aug 2026, 13:555,856first reading

Engagement

42 posts held, back to 25 June 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 9 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
88.3%
avg views ÷ 5,842 subscribers
Avg views / post
5,160
9 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.883%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
9
of 42 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views — note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 4 November 2026
Posts held42 (25 June 2026 – 4 November 2026)
Views total46,450
Reactions total410
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken4 Nov 2026, 16:07 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

Reaction mix

2,398 reactions across 42 posts, in 33 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 27.7% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍66427.7%
❤45018.8%
🤬43818.3%
🔥28011.7%
🙏1425.92%
👎662.75%
👏602.50%
🤡502.09%
🎉471.96%
👀401.67%
🤪200.834%
🤯150.626%
⚡140.584%
🤔140.584%
😱130.542%
🤮120.5%
🍾110.459%
🙈110.459%
🤝100.417%
🖕90.375%
13 further kinds321.33%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 42 of the 42 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 2,398 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 42 most recent posts we hold, published 25 June 2026 to 4 November 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
10
across the posts below
Posts paid on
7
of 42 we hold a reading for · 17%
Most on one post
3
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @TheSCOTUSFocus. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.

Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.

This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.

Counted over the 42 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 25 June 2026 to 4 November 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.

Recent posts

Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 0 of 9 posts held from the last 30 days (0%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).

4 Nov 2026, 11:28 UTC≈2,030 views7 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Good Wednesday Morning Everyone! Today the justices will convene for one oral argument this morning in a case about federal habeas corpus. 1). Guerrero v. Johnson 25-1003 - Dexter Johnson is challenging restrictions on successive federal habeas corpus petitions. Federal law generally limits prisoners’ ability to file repeated petitions challenging their convictions or sentences. One exception permits a successive …

👍4💅2❤1

3 Nov 2026, 11:50 UTC≈3,250 views28 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Happy Election Day Everyone! Today, millions of Americans across the nation will be heading to the polls to cast their ballots for the midterm elections. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court will sit for oral argument in a case that could affect Employment Division v. Smith. 1). St. Mary Catholic Parish v. Roy 25-581 - St. Mary Catholic Parish operates a Catholic preschool in Colorado. The state offers funding to eligibl…

❤25👍2💅1

2 Nov 2026, 23:00 UTC≈7,760 views104 reactionsread 4 November 2026
Photo

BREAKING - Supreme Court rejects bid from Trump administration to allow 20,000+ ballots in California to be set aside, citing suspected irregularities and non citizens voting. There are no noted dissents.

🤬83🤯15👻3❤1👍1🔥1

2 Nov 2026, 22:20 UTC≈4,640 views12 reactionsread 4 November 2026

JUST IN - Supreme Court releases its January sitting schedule. Click the link below to find out which cases are being argued during that month. Link - https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalJanuary2027.pdf

👍11🤪1

2 Nov 2026, 11:35 UTC≈3,890 views26 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Happy November Everyone! Justices will convene this morning for their November sitting with two cases for oral arguments. 1). Maxwell v. Dinis 25-5930 - William Maxwell disputes how his earned time credits under the First Step Act were handled. Those credits can help eligible federal prisoners move sooner to halfway houses or home confinement. The case also raises questions about what happens when prison officials…

👍25💅1

22 Oct 2026, 22:39 UTC≈4,730 views70 reactionsread 4 November 2026

JUST IN - Supreme Court rules 8-1 to allow New Hampshire’s voter ID guidance to continue for the midterm elections, citing Purcell. Justice Jackson dissented. Link - https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/26pdf/26a512_6j37.pdf

👍47🔥22💅1

14 Oct 2026, 21:14 UTC≈8,740 views100 reactionsread 4 November 2026

BREAKING - Supreme Court rules 7-2 in favor of the Trump administration over a dispute regarding FCC Political Ads low cost rates. Justice Sotomayor and Justice Jackson noted their dissent. Link - https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/26pdf/26a476_k537.pdf

❤55🔥27👍14🤪4

14 Oct 2026, 10:25 UTC≈5,680 views30 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Good Wednesday Morning Everyone! Today is the justice as we sit for one oral argument this morning. 1). Salazar v. Paramount Global — No. 25-459 - This case concerns the meaning of the VPPA statute's definition of a “consumer,” specifically whether it covers people who receive any goods or services from a video provider or only those who receive its audiovisual offerings. Arguments for this case begin at 10 a.m. …

👍23❤7

13 Oct 2026, 10:15 UTC≈5,730 views33 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Happy Tuesday Everyone! Today the justices will convene to hear one case for oral argument this morning. 1). Beaird v. United States — No. 25-5343 - Kendrick Beaird challenges a federal sentencing enhancement that increased his recommended prison sentence because his firearm had a 17-round magazine. The enhancement relied on commentary to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, rather than an explicit definition in the…

👍33

7 Oct 2026, 10:50 UTC≈6,010 views38 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Good Wednesday Morning Everyone! It’s another day of our arguments, the justices will sit to hear one case this morning, let’s dive right in. 1). Department of the Air Force v. Prutehi Guåhan — No. 25-579 - The case concerns the proposed Live-Fire Training Range Complex at Andersen Air Force Base. The environmental dispute centers on whether the Air Force adequately complied with federal environmental requirement…

👍20🤡12❤5😈1

6 Oct 2026, 10:35 UTC≈5,990 views26 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Happy Tuesday Everyone! It’s the second day of oral arguments this term and we are taking it easy this morning with one case up on the docket for arguments. 1). Anderson v. Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee — No. 25-498 - This case comes from Intel’s retirement plans. The plans used customized portfolios that included traditional assets along with things like hedge funds and private equity. Former Intel empl…

👍11🤝10❤3🤡1🤮1

5 Oct 2026, 10:02 UTC≈6,740 views40 reactionsread 4 November 2026

Good Monday Morning Everyone! It’s officially Day 1 of the 2026-2027 Supreme Court term. We are happy to be the one you trust to bring all the news regarding the Supreme Court right to your fingertips. Let’s take a look at the two cases being argued this morning. 1). Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County - A major climate change case that could determine the future of civil lawsuit…

👍36❤3🤮1

Showing the 12 most recent of 42 posts we hold for @TheSCOTUSFocus. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Forward network

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels

The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.

Patriots Rising
@PatriotsRising1 · 30,887
Telegram ranks this channel #47 of 47 here — alongside 46 others — read 5 September 2026
Patriot Princess 777
@patriot_princess · 38,756
Telegram ranks this channel #48 of 48 here — alongside 47 others — read 30 August 2026

This channel appears in 2 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 10 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Supreme Court Announcements/Decisions” (@TheSCOTUSFocus), 5,842 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/TheSCOTUSFocus.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.