October Term 2011 · Docket 10-1016
Does the FMLA's self-care leave provision violate the Constitution?
the side that brought the case argues the law's self-care clause lacks a valid constitutional basis. the opposing side claims it addresses gender discrimination.
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's counsel argued the law is distinguishable from prior precedent.
the opposing side's counsel cited historical context to support the legislation's validity.
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 11, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 15-1 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 15-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- 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 5-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 3-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 3-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 51-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 51-17
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the validity of a federal leave law. the side that brought the case seeks reversal of a lower court decision. the opposing side seeks affirmation of that decision.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 11, 2012.
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 reverse the lower court judgment.
the opposing side wants the Court to affirm the lower court judgment.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues the self-care provision is not a valid exercise of congressional power.
the opposing side argues the provision addresses historical discrimination against women.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
What the justices asked
Justice Alito asked how equal leave affects employer incentives.
Justice Sotomayor noted legislative records show a dual motive for the law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 15-1 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 15-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 3-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 3-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 51-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 51-17
Why it matters
The outcome defines the scope of federal power to regulate private employment. It determines whether Congress can mandate equal leave for all employees. This affects how employers structure benefits and hiring practices nationwide.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
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 11, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 15-1 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 15-1
- 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 5-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-5 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-7 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 19-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 19-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 33-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 33-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 3-35 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 3-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 51-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 51-17
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 22, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-3 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-3
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.