{"argument_date":"2003-03-05T00:00:00Z","arguments":[{"argument_date":"2003-03-05T00:00:00Z","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/2002/02-258.pdf","paragraphs":["Robert Peck argued Congress managed jurisdiction boundaries. He stated the statute had two specific goals.","Lamken argued the tolling provision is constitutional. He claimed it reflects distinct federal legal events.","Lindemann argued Congress intruded on state sovereignty. He stated the case involves more than tolling."],"reargument":false,"sequence":1,"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-60","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 15, lines 27-60"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 1-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 1-29"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-41"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 15-17","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 44, lines 15-17"}]}],"caption":"Jinks v. Richland County","case_history":[{"changed_at":"2026-08-29T20:06:31.391811Z","explanation":"An official oral-argument transcript was verified.","status":"argued"}],"case_status":"argued","dek":"the sides that brought the case seek to revive a state claim dismissed in federal court. the opposing sides argue the federal statute violates state sovereignty.","dek_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-60","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 15, lines 27-60"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 1-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 1-29"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-41"}],"dispositions":[],"latest_court_document_date":"2003-03-05T00:00:00Z","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/02-258.html","primary_docket":"02-258","revisions":[{"correction_note":"Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.","created_at":"2026-08-31T16:25:28.054755Z","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":["This case tests the reach of federal supplemental jurisdiction. It asks if federal law can pause state time limits for claims dismissed in federal court."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-60","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 15, lines 27-60"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 1-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 1-29"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-41"}]},{"heading":"How the case got here","paragraphs":["The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 5, 2003."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-13"}]},{"heading":"What each side wants","paragraphs":["the sides that brought the case want to revive their state claim. They argue federal law pauses state time limits.","the opposing sides want to keep the dismissal. They argue federal law cannot override state sovereignty."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-60","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 15, lines 27-60"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 1-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 1-29"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-41"}]},{"heading":"What each side says","paragraphs":["the sides that brought the case argue Congress validly managed jurisdiction boundaries. They claim the tolling provision reflects federal legal events.","the opposing sides argue Congress intruded on state sovereignty. They claim the statute exceeds federal power."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-60","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 15, lines 27-60"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 1-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 1-29"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-41"}]},{"heading":"What the justices asked","paragraphs":["Does the federal tolling provision violate state sovereignty?","Can federal law pause state time limits for dismissed claims?"],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 15-17","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 44, lines 15-17"}]},{"heading":"Why it matters","paragraphs":["This dispute defines the boundary between federal and state power. It determines whether federal courts can extend state time limits. The outcome shapes the scope of federal jurisdiction over state claims."],"sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-60","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 15, lines 27-60"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 1-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 1-29"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-41"}]},{"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/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 5-13"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 44, lines 15-17","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 44, lines 15-17"}]}],"slug":"2002-02-258-jinks-v-richland-county","term":"2002","title":"Does federal supplemental jurisdiction toll state time limits?","title_sources":[{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 27-60","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 15, lines 27-60"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 1-29","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 19, lines 1-29"},{"evidence_type":"Transcript","label":"Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-41","official_url":"https://www.supremecourt.gov/pdfs/transcripts/2002/02-258.pdf","page_label":"file page 3, lines 15-41"}],"topics":[],"undated_disposition_date_fallback":null,"updated_at":"2026-09-05T03:22:24Z"}