October Term 2008 · Docket 105 ORIG.
Can Congress limit the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction?
Kansas and Colorado dispute whether federal statutes allow the Court to award expert fees in this original jurisdiction case.
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
Kansas advocate Steve Six argued Article III distinguishes appellate and original jurisdiction.
Six claimed Congress lacks power to regulate original jurisdiction exceptions.
Colorado advocate Suthers argued the special master correctly read the fee statute.
Suthers stated Section 1821 of Title 28 is unambiguous.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 45-25 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 45-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-41
- 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 41-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-9
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Kansas seeks expert fees under a specific statute. Colorado argues the Court lacks power to award them in original jurisdiction cases.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 45-25 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 45-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-33
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 1, 2008.
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
Kansas wants the Court to award expert fees under the specific statute.
Colorado wants the Court to deny the fee request based on jurisdictional limits.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 45-25 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 45-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-33
What each side says
Kansas argues the specific statute clearly authorizes the fee award.
Colorado argues Congress cannot regulate the Court's original jurisdiction powers.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 45-25 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 45-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-33
What the justices asked
Justice Kennedy asked if the 1911 statute alone justifies the relief.
Justice Alito asked if the Court has discretion to set fee amounts.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 41-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-9
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of federal fee awards in disputes between states. It clarifies the balance of power between Congress and the Supreme Court.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 45-25 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 45-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-33
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 35-41 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 35-41
- 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 41-7 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 31-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 31-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-23 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 11-17 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 11-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-9
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 26, lines 45-25 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 45-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 45-25 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 45-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-33
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.