{"argument_date":"2001-02-26T00:00:00Z","arguments":[{"argument_date":"2001-02-26T00:00:00Z","heading":"What happened at the argument","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2000","official_transcript_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","paragraphs":["Mr. Kerrigan cited a recent case suggesting an assignee status in law.","Mr. Lamken argued the California Labor Code does not violate due process for three reasons.","Mr. Seideman responded to a question about the client's actions after payment was withheld."],"reargument":false,"sequence":1,"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 15-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 7-15","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 27, lines 7-15"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 11-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 53, lines 7-19"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 3-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 56, lines 3-5"}]}],"caption":"Lujan v. G & G Fire Sprinklers, Inc.","case_history":[{"changed_at":"2026-08-29T20:06:33.412855Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"},{"changed_at":"2026-08-29T20:06:33.429420Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"}],"case_status":"argued","dek":"The dispute centers on whether a state law denies a property interest without due process.","dek_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 15-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 7-15","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 27, lines 7-15"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 11-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 53, lines 7-19"}],"dispositions":[],"latest_court_document_date":"2001-02-26T00:00:00Z","maturity":"official_transcript","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2000","official_disposition_urls":[],"official_docket_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/00-152.html","primary_docket":"00-152","revisions":[{"correction_note":"Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.","created_at":"2026-08-31T18:06:02.446414Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":1},{"correction_note":"Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.","created_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z","maturity":"official_transcript","revision_number":2}],"schema_version":"1.1","sections":[{"heading":"What this case is about","paragraphs":["The case involves a dispute over payment withheld by a prime contractor. One side argues the state law violates due process. The other side argues the law is constitutional."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 15-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 7-15","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 27, lines 7-15"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 11-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 53, lines 7-19"}]},{"heading":"How the case got here","paragraphs":["The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 26, 2001."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 3-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 56, lines 3-5"}]},{"heading":"What each side wants","paragraphs":["One side wants the court to find the state law unconstitutional.","The other side wants the court to uphold the state law."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 15-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 7-15","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 27, lines 7-15"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 11-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 53, lines 7-19"}]},{"heading":"What each side says","paragraphs":["One side argues the state law deprives a party of a property interest without due process.","The other side argues the state law does not deprive a party of a property interest without due process."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 15-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 7-15","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 27, lines 7-15"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 11-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 53, lines 7-19"}]},{"heading":"What the justices asked","paragraphs":["What did the client do after the prime withheld payment?","Did the client seek redress or respond to the withheld payment?"],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 3-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 56, lines 3-5"}]},{"heading":"Why it matters","paragraphs":["The outcome determines whether state labor codes can withhold payments without violating constitutional due process protections."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 15-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 7-15","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 27, lines 7-15"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 11-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 53, lines 7-19"}]},{"heading":"What happens next","paragraphs":["This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-9","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-9"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 3-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 56, lines 3-5"}]}],"slug":"2000-00-152-lujan-v-g-g-fire-sprinklers-inc","term":"2000","title":"Does a state labor code violate due process by withholding payment?","title_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 15-43","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 16, lines 15-43"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 7-15","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 27, lines 7-15"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 11-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 11-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 7-19","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2000/00-152.pdf","page_label":"file page 53, lines 7-19"}],"topics":[],"undated_disposition_date_fallback":null,"updated_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z"}