The Supreme Court grants certiorari in roughly 1% of petitions each term, hearing about 60-80 cases out of thousands filed annually. This case (No. 25-490) involves a challenge to the Boy Scouts of America's bankruptcy plan, specifically its nonconsensual third-party releases shielding non-debtors (like local councils, sponsoring organizations, and insurers) from abuse claims. The petitioners argue that the Third Circuit's affirmation of the plan conflicts with the Court's 2024 decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma, which prohibited such releases under the Bankruptcy Code, and that mootness doctrines were misapplied to bar review. Several factors could modestly improve the odds beyond the baseline: Post-Purdue clarification needed**: The Third Circuit acknowledged the releases would likely fail under Purdue if proposed today but upheld them due to statutory (§ 363(m)) and equitable mootness, citing the plan's substantial consummation and finality concerns. This raises unresolved questions about applying Purdue to already-confirmed plans, potentially warranting review. - Possible circuit splits: Disagreements exist among circuits on whether § 363(m) mootness applies to integrated plan sales (like the insurance buyback here) and the validity of equitable mootness overall, which the Supreme Court has not definitively addressed. Amicus support: Two amicus briefs were filed in support of the petitioners, including one from retired bankruptcy judge Hon. Eugene Wedoff and others, signaling broader interest. High stakes: The petition holds up distribution of about $1.5 billion in settlement funds for abuse survivors, affecting thousands of claimants in a high-profile bankruptcy. That said, the case is at its first conference (January 9, 2026), with no relists yet—relisted petitions have much higher grant rates (around 50-70%). It's not currently featured on SCOTUSblog's "petitions we're watching" list, which often highlights frontrunners. Respondents (including BSA and insurers) have filed oppositions, and without strong signals like a call for views from the Solicitor General or more amicus activity, the chances remain low overall—likely in the 5-10% range based on similar bankruptcy cases with doctrinal tensions, though this is an educated estimate without insider predictions available.