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
Background and question before the Court
According to Petitioner, rent‑A‑Center, West, Inc. and Antonio Jackson entered into an agreement that includes an arbitration clause giving the arbitrator exclusive authority over challenges to the contract’s enforceability.
According to Petitioner, the parties dispute specific provisions such as the discovery clause, fee provisions, and claim‑exclusion terms.
What each side argues
Petitioner (Rent‑A‑Center, West, Inc.)
The petitioner argues that the agreement should be enforced as written, with no statutory impediment, and that the arbitrator has exclusive authority to decide any challenge to the contract’s enforceability.
The petitioner contends that the dispute involves specific provisions such as the discovery clause, fee provisions, and claim‑exclusion terms.
According to Mr. Friedman, the petitioner maintains that issues of procedural unconscionability, such as unequal bargaining power, are not for the arbitrator to address.
According to Mr. Silverberg, the petitioner asserts that challenges to the contract as a whole should be decided by the arbitrator.
Respondent (Antonio Jackson)
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
What happened at oral argument
According to Justice Scalia, justice Scalia questioned whether unconscionability is equivalent to coercion.
According to Justice Ginsburg, justice Ginsburg inquired who decides the issue of unconscionability.
According to Justice Sotomayor, justice Sotomayor probed whether an argument that the arbitration agreement is one‑sided should be addressed to the entire agreement.
Justice Breyer asked whether the court needs to decide the unconscionability issue.
According to Justice Sotomayor, justice Sotomayor clarified the distinction between “making” (e.g., fees) and unconscionability (e.g., discovery).
According to Justice Scalia, justice Scalia raised the point that without access to arbitration, the issue cannot be left to the arbitrator.
- [1] 9140a2dfb3f638214920-r1-ac1a5cdb9cb56529.pdf, p. 20
- [2] 9140a2dfb3f638214920-r1-ac1a5cdb9cb56529.pdf, p. 38
- [3] 9140a2dfb3f638214920-r1-ac1a5cdb9cb56529.pdf, p. 42
- [4] 9140a2dfb3f638214920-r1-ac1a5cdb9cb56529.pdf, p. 57
- [5] 9140a2dfb3f638214920-r1-ac1a5cdb9cb56529.pdf, p. 58
- [6] 9140a2dfb3f638214920-r1-ac1a5cdb9cb56529.pdf, p. 59
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.
- 9140a2dfb3f638214920-r1-ac1a5cdb9cb56529.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 23, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.