October Term 2004 · Docket 03-1407

Does a debtor keep tax-free IRA funds in bankruptcy?

the sides that brought the case seek to exempt IRA funds from bankruptcy. the opposing sides argue the funds are not exempt.

Official caption
Rousey v. Jocaway
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — 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.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Ms. Karlan argued statutory interpretation is a holistic process.

    Ms. McKiever argued two requirements must be met for exemption.

    Justice Scalia questioned if tax benefits trigger age-based restrictions.

    Justice Ginsburg noted the funds were shielded while in the plan.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests whether a debtor can shield IRA funds from bankruptcy creditors. the sides that brought the case want to keep the funds. the opposing sides want the funds available to creditors.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 1, 2004.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want to keep IRA funds exempt from bankruptcy.

the opposing sides want the IRA funds available to creditors.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue statutory interpretation requires a holistic reading.

the opposing sides argue the funds lack full enjoyment due to tax rules.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Stevens asked what the word holistic means.

Justice O'Connor asked if the issue was based on age.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the scope of bankruptcy exemptions for retirement funds. It determines whether debtors retain tax-advantaged assets during financial distress. Creditors rely on these funds to satisfy debts. The outcome shapes national bankruptcy policy.

Official sources for this section

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 Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON