October Term 2011 · Docket 10-948
Does a federal consumer law ban arbitration agreements?
Creditors argue a federal law allows arbitration. Consumers say the law bans it.
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
Michael McConnell argued for the sides that brought the case. He said the Court has rejected arguments that such statutes override the Federal Arbitration Act.
Justice Alito asked what statutory language would eliminate the ability to enter arbitration agreements. He suggested language expressly prohibiting waiver of the right to sue.
Justice Kagan asked where the distinction between procedural and substantive rights comes from. She noted it seems atextual in the cases cited by the sides that brought the case.
Chief Justice Roberts asked if a lawsuit typically describes arbitration. He used a car accident example to illustrate the colloquial use of the term.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 33-47 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 33-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- 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 15-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 43-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 43-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-45
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The dispute centers on the Credit Repair Organizations Act. It creates a right to sue. It also bars waiver of rights. the sides that brought the case say this does not ban arbitration. the opposing sides say it does.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 11, 2011.
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 sides that brought the case want the Court to allow arbitration agreements. They argue the law does not ban them.
the opposing sides want the Court to ban arbitration agreements. They argue the law explicitly protects the right to sue.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the Federal Arbitration Act favors arbitration. They say the consumer law is not explicit enough to override this policy.
the opposing sides argue the consumer law explicitly creates a right to sue. They say this right is non-waivable by contract.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Roberts asked if a lawsuit typically describes arbitration. He asked if a person in arbitration is in a lawsuit.
Justice Kagan asked where the distinction between procedural and substantive rights comes from. She noted it seems atextual in the cases cited by the sides that brought the case.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 27-33 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 33-47 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 33-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 43-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 43-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-45
Why it matters
This case determines if consumers can be forced into arbitration. It affects the scope of federal consumer protections. It clarifies the interaction between arbitration law and consumer statutes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
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 27-33 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 27-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 33-47 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 33-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 13-15 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 13-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 41-3 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 41-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 37-45 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 37-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-1
- 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 15-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 43-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 43-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-35 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 15-25 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 15-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-45
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 17, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-1 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-1
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.