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
The case concerns whether Section 2501 of Title 28, which imposes a six‑year filing deadline, limits the Court of Federal Claims’ subject‑matter jurisdiction or is an ordinary, waivable affirmative defense.
Background and question before the Court
During oral argument the Court asked several questions about the structure of prior statutes and Congress’s intent, indicating that the central issue is how Section 2501 should be interpreted.
What each side argues
Petitioner Position
According to Petitioner (Jeffrey K. Haynes), according to Petitioner (Jeffrey K. Haynes), petitioner argues that Section 2501 does not limit subject‑matter jurisdiction and should be applied to the government as an ordinary, waivable affirmative defense.
According to Mr. Haynes, petitioner further contends that, consistent with Franconia, once sovereign immunity is waived the statute of limitations applies to the government.
According to Petitioner, petitioner concludes that while the government may have won the immediate battle, it lost the broader war on the Irwin rule.
Respondent Position
According to Mr. Stewart, respondent argues that the language of Section 2501, as explained by Chief Justice Rehnquist, addresses equitable tolling rather than waivability, suggesting the statute is not a waivable defense.
What happened at oral argument
Appearances were made by counsel for the petitioner and the United States.
Justices asked questions about the structure of prior statutes, whether Congress was aware of the general rule, and the relationship between sovereign immunity, jurisdiction, and equitable tolling.
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.
- 3c9dd53380e100b2b93a-r1-189d4ae6e2c5370f.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 22, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.