October Term 2005 · Docket 04-1131
Can federal courts review employee constitutional claims?
The dispute centers on whether the Civil Service Reform Act bars federal courts from hearing constitutional claims by federal employees.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — 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
Ms. Karlan argued the government conceded the lower court erred.
Mr. Stewart argued review should align with the statute's structure.
Justice Scalia questioned the realism of describing the search as unrelated to employment.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-54 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-25 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 5-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 7-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 25-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 25-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 1-7 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 1-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-17
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case involves a federal employee who challenged a drug test. The lower court dismissed the claim. The employee argues the court had jurisdiction. The government argues the statute limits review.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-25 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-25
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 5, 2005.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-7
What each side wants
The employee wants the Supreme Court to allow federal courts to hear the constitutional claim.
The government wants the Supreme Court to limit judicial review of the claim.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-25 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-25
What each side says
The employee argues the statute does not clearly bar all judicial review of constitutional claims.
The government argues the negotiated grievance procedure strips federal courts of jurisdiction.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-25 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-25
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if the search was unrelated to employee action.
Justice Kennedy asked if the jurisdictional question was raised in briefs.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-54 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 5-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 7-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 25-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 25-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 1-7 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 1-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-17
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of federal court jurisdiction over employee constitutional claims. It determines whether statutory grievance procedures bar judicial review. The outcome shapes the balance between agency authority and individual rights.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-25 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-25
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 29-35 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 29-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-54 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-54
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 33-7 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 33-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 39-39 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 39-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 17-19 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 17-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 5-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 62, lines 7-11 — Transcript, file page 62, lines 7-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 25-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 25-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 1-7 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 1-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-17
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 29, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-25 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 11-11 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 11-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-27 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 3-25 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 3-25
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.