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 Ms. Brinkmann, the parties also argue about the scope of judicial review under Section 9, which limits review to the statutory grounds listed in the statute.
Background and question before the Court
According to Mr. Phillips, Hall Street Associates contends that Section 2 provides a mechanism for a district court to correct an erroneous arbitration award.
According to Ms. Brinkmann, Mattel argues that Section 9 restricts judicial review to the specific statutory grounds listed in the Arbitration Act.
According to Justice Ginsburg, justices asked whether the agreement provided for de novo review in the district court and whether the judge’s control over a non‑Article III arbitrator raised constitutional concerns.
What each side argues
Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. (Petitioner)
According to Mr. Phillips, under Section 2, the district court should correct an arbitration award that is erroneous as a matter of law.
Mattel, Inc. (Respondent)
According to Ms. Brinkmann, Section 9 limits judicial review to the statutory grounds listed in the Arbitration Act.
What happened at oral argument
According to Chief Justice Roberts, chief Justice Roberts announced the hearing of argument for Case 06‑989, Hall Street Associates v. Mattel, Inc.
The Court noted the oral argument of Beth S. Brinkmann on behalf of the respondent.
Justice Ginsburg asked whether the agreement provided for de novo review in the district court.
According to Justice Scalia, justice Scalia questioned whether there are non‑binding arbitrations.
According to Justice Souter, justice Souter remarked about Section 9 and the desire to eliminate it.
According to Justice Ginsburg, justice Ginsburg expressed concern that giving a non‑Article III person more control over an arbitrator might raise constitutional issues.
- [1] 888c4228cc2079b449a3-r1-50300a32c43e5adb.pdf, p. 3
- [2] 888c4228cc2079b449a3-r1-50300a32c43e5adb.pdf, p. 31
- [3] 888c4228cc2079b449a3-r1-50300a32c43e5adb.pdf, p. 3
- [4] 888c4228cc2079b449a3-r1-50300a32c43e5adb.pdf, p. 5
- [5] 888c4228cc2079b449a3-r1-50300a32c43e5adb.pdf, pp. 21–22
- [6] 888c4228cc2079b449a3-r1-50300a32c43e5adb.pdf, p. 42
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.
- 888c4228cc2079b449a3-r1-50300a32c43e5adb.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 22, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.