This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Petitioners' counsel (Mr. Eckland), according to Petitioners' counsel (Mr. Eckland), the petitioners filed their lawsuit within six years of the alleged breach.
Background and question before the Court
According to Jeff H. Eckland, the central issue is whether the congressional statute creates an immediate breach of contract or only a breach when the agency acts to deny a pre‑payment request.
What each side argues
Petitioners' Position
According to Jeff H. Eckland, they argue the breach is not immediate; it occurs only when the agency denies a pre‑payment request.
According to Petitioners' counsel (Mr. Eckland), according to Petitioners' counsel (Mr. Eckland), they filed suit within six years of the alleged breach.
Respondent's Position
According to Respondent's counsel (Mr. Roberts), according to Respondent's counsel (Mr. Roberts), the United States argues that the breach occurred at the time the statute was passed, constituting a breach of the promise not to impose additional legal restrictions on pre‑payment.
According to Mr. Roberts, they contend the breach is present, not anticipatory.
According to Mr. Roberts, damages are measurable, and the government can be sued for them.
What happened at oral argument
According to Chief Justice Rehnquist, chief Justice Rehnquist announced the case for argument.
Justice Scalia asked Mr. Eckland about seeking fair compensation.
According to Unnamed Justice, an unnamed Justice questioned why the petitioners waited more than six years to sue.
An unnamed Justice asked whether the government can break a contract.
According to Justice, a Justice compared the situation to anticipatory breach in private contracts.
According to Justice, a Justice expressed concern about practical consequences for real‑estate contracts.
- [1] da9b76047a660d1bf76b-r1-e6fc2e64bc15950f.pdf, p. 3
- [2] da9b76047a660d1bf76b-r1-e6fc2e64bc15950f.pdf, p. 4
- [3] da9b76047a660d1bf76b-r1-e6fc2e64bc15950f.pdf, p. 20
- [4] da9b76047a660d1bf76b-r1-e6fc2e64bc15950f.pdf, p. 31
- [5] da9b76047a660d1bf76b-r1-e6fc2e64bc15950f.pdf, p. 38
- [6] da9b76047a660d1bf76b-r1-e6fc2e64bc15950f.pdf, p. 45
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- da9b76047a660d1bf76b-r1-e6fc2e64bc15950f.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 19, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.