{"argument_date":"2002-11-04T00:00:00Z","arguments":[{"argument_date":"2002-11-04T00:00:00Z","heading":"What happened at the argument","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2002","official_transcript_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","paragraphs":["Mr. Clement argued the 1995 amendment is constitutional. He stated it protects data collected for federal highway funds. He claimed this prevents use in state and federal court litigation.","Mr. Mungia argued the statute fails the South Dakota v. Dole requirements. He stated section 409 is not conditional. He asserted the plain language shows it lacks conditional nature.","Mr. Hamilton corrected a misstatement by the opposing side's counsel. He addressed the outcome if the Court adopts the United States position. He clarified the plaintiffs' claim regarding document access."],"reargument":false,"sequence":1,"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 17-45","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 17-45"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-5"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 25-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 36, lines 25-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 43-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 52, lines 43-25"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 27-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 55, lines 27-29"}]}],"caption":"Pierce County v. Guillen","case_history":[{"changed_at":"2026-08-29T20:06:31.690013Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"},{"changed_at":"2026-08-29T20:06:31.848353Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"}],"case_status":"argued","dek":"Pierce County seeks to block a state court from using federal highway data in a lawsuit.","dek_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 17-45","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 17-45"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-5"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 25-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 36, lines 25-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 43-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 52, lines 43-25"}],"dispositions":[],"latest_court_document_date":"2002-11-04T00:00:00Z","maturity":"official_transcript","official_detail_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcript/2002","official_disposition_urls":[],"official_docket_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/01-1229.html","primary_docket":"01-1229","revisions":[{"correction_note":"Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.","created_at":"2026-08-31T16:46:55.798348Z","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":["Pierce County argues a federal law protects highway data from state court use. Guillen argues the law fails constitutional tests and allows the data in court."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 17-45","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 17-45"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-5"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 25-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 36, lines 25-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 43-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 52, lines 43-25"}]},{"heading":"How the case got here","paragraphs":["The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 4, 2002."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 27-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 55, lines 27-29"}]},{"heading":"What each side wants","paragraphs":["Pierce County wants the Supreme Court to uphold the federal data protection law.","Guillen wants the Supreme Court to allow the state court to use the highway data."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 17-45","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 17-45"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-5"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 25-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 36, lines 25-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 43-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 52, lines 43-25"}]},{"heading":"What each side says","paragraphs":["Pierce County argues the law constitutionally shields federal highway data from state litigation.","Guillen argues the law is not conditional and fails the South Dakota v. Dole test."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 17-45","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 17-45"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-5"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 25-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 36, lines 25-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 43-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 52, lines 43-25"}]},{"heading":"What the justices asked","paragraphs":["Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if adopting the United States position gives plaintiffs the documents."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 27-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 55, lines 27-29"}]},{"heading":"Why it matters","paragraphs":["This case defines whether federal highway data remains private in state courts. It determines if states can access this data for litigation. It shapes the balance between federal data collection and state judicial power."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 17-45","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 17-45"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-5"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 25-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 36, lines 25-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 43-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 52, lines 43-25"}]},{"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 5-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 27-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 55, lines 27-29"}]}],"slug":"2002-01-1229-pierce-county-v-guillen","term":"2002","title":"Can Congress restrict state court access to highway safety data?","title_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 17-45","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 17-45"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-5","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-5"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 25-27","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 36, lines 25-27"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 43-25","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/01-1229.pdf","page_label":"file page 52, lines 43-25"}],"topics":[],"undated_disposition_date_fallback":null,"updated_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z"}