October Term 2014 · Docket 13-1019

Can courts review EEOC conciliation efforts?

Mach Mining seeks judicial review of EEOC settlement attempts. The EEOC argues courts lack authority to inspect these private negotiations.

Official caption
Mach Mining, LLC v. EEOC
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — 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.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mach Mining's counsel argued Title VII prohibits suits without prior conciliation attempts.

    The EEOC's counsel argued the Seventh Circuit correctly rejected broad judicial review.

    Justice Kennedy noted the government's theory lacked strong case law support.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The dispute centers on whether federal courts can examine the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's pre-suit conciliation efforts. Mach Mining argues Title VII requires this modest inquiry. The EEOC contends the statute grants it exclusive discretion over settlement terms.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 13, 2015.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Mach Mining wants courts to verify the EEOC attempted good-faith conciliation.

The EEOC wants courts to defer entirely to its internal settlement decisions.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Mach Mining argues Title VII mandates a modest judicial inquiry into conciliation efforts.

The EEOC argues the statute grants it exclusive prerogative to define acceptable offers.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Scalia questioned whether the EEOC could act in bad faith during conciliation.

Justice Kagan asked if the statute clearly gives the EEOC sole authority over offers.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the scope of judicial oversight over federal agency enforcement. It determines whether private employers face unchecked administrative power. The outcome shapes the balance between agency discretion and statutory accountability.

Official sources for this section

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 Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON