October Term 2006 · Docket 06-116
Does the Supreme Court have jurisdiction to review a dispute between two Guamanian officials?
The parties dispute whether the Supreme Court can review a conflict between two Guamanian officials over the Organic Act.
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
Ms. Brinkmann argued the petition was untimely.
Mr. Waxman argued the Organic Act supports review.
Chief Justice Roberts questioned the existence of a justiciable controversy.
Justice Scalia asked when the Ninth Circuit lost jurisdiction.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 31-11 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 31-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 27-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 27-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 9-37 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 9-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-39
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case involves a dispute between two Guamanian officials. The core issue is whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear the matter.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 9-37 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 9-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 8, 2007.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
Ms. Brinkmann wants the Court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.
Mr. Waxman wants the Court to reverse the lower court decision.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 9-37 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 9-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
What each side says
Ms. Brinkmann argues the certiorari petition was filed too late.
Mr. Waxman argues the Organic Act supports the Court's jurisdiction.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 9-37 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 9-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
What the justices asked
Justice Kennedy asked if the test involves colorable jurisdiction under a clear federal statute.
Chief Justice Roberts asked if the Court had a case or controversy under Article III.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 31-11 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 31-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 27-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 27-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-39
Why it matters
The outcome determines whether the Supreme Court can resolve internal disputes between territorial officials.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 9-37 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 9-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
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 10, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 31-11 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 31-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 27-35 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 27-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 39-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 39-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-47 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 25-39
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 25, lines 9-37 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 9-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 9-37 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 9-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-51
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.