October Term 2003 · Docket 03-221
Does AEDPA's one-year limit apply to federal habeas petitions?
the side that brought the case argues the one-year limit does not apply. the opposing side argues the limit applies to all federal habeas petitions.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Roadarmel argued the one-year limit does not apply to this petition.
Ms. Bassis argued the one-year limit applies to this petition.
Chief Justice Rehnquist confirmed the advocate's name pronunciation.
Chief Justice Rehnquist closed the argument session.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-6 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 21-25
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the scope of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. The statute imposes a one-year limit on federal habeas petitions. The limit follows the finality of a state criminal conviction. The parties dispute whether this limit applies to the current petition.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-6 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-6
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 21, 2004.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-16
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to reject the one-year limit for this petition.
the opposing side wants the Court to enforce the one-year limit on this petition.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-6 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-6
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues the one-year limit does not apply to this specific federal habeas petition.
the opposing side argues the one-year limit applies to all federal habeas petitions after state conviction finality.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-6 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-6
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if he pronounced the advocate's name correctly.
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the advocate confirmed the pronunciation.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 21-25
Why it matters
The outcome defines the deadline for federal habeas petitions. It determines when prisoners must file these claims. It shapes the scope of federal review of state convictions. It affects the balance between finality and individual rights.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-6 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-6
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 21-25
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-6 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-6 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-6
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.