October Term 2007 · Docket 06-1164
Does a six-year filing deadline strip courts of power to hear tax refund claims?
The dispute centers on whether a six-year filing deadline acts as a strict jurisdictional bar or a waivable procedural rule.
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
the side that brought the case argued the deadline is a nonwaivable jurisdictional limit on the court's authority.
The government argued the deadline is a strict jurisdictional limit that bars the right and remedy.
questions_asked_by_justices
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 17-37 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 17-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
- 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 13-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 51-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 51-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-41
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the legal nature of a six-year filing deadline for tax refund claims against the United States.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 17-37 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 17-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 6, 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
the side that brought the case wants the Court to treat the deadline as a waivable procedural rule.
The government wants the Court to treat the deadline as a strict jurisdictional bar.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 17-37 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 17-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues the deadline is a nonwaivable limit on the court's authority to enter money judgments.
The government argues the deadline is a strict jurisdictional limit that bars the right and remedy.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 17-37 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 17-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if the deadline bars the right as well as the remedy.
Justice Breyer asked how the Court should write the opinion on this issue.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 51-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 51-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-41
Why it matters
This issue determines whether taxpayers lose their claims permanently if they miss the filing deadline.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 17-37 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 17-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
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 23-29 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 11-23
- 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 13-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 27-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 27-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 49-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 49-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 17-25 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 17-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 51-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 51-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-3 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 35-41
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 17-37 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 17-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 17-37 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 17-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
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.