October Term 2015 · Docket 14-770

Can Congress pass a law that applies only to one specific pending lawsuit?

the sides that brought the case argue a statute targeting a single case violates the Constitution. the opposing sides claim Congress may amend laws for pending cases.

Official caption
Markazi v. Peterson
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

    Mr. Lamken argued that Congress has never limited a statute to one specific case.

    Mr. Kneedler argued that Congress may amend laws to apply to pending cases.

    Mr. Olson argued that the case involves a particular outcome and property.

    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 case involves a statute that targets a specific pending lawsuit. The core dispute is whether Congress can limit a law's effect to one case.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 13, 2016.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want the Court to strike down the statute as unconstitutional.

the opposing sides want the Court to uphold the statute and apply it to the case.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue Congress has never enacted a statute limited to one specific pending case.

the opposing sides argue Congress may amend laws to apply to pending cases based on precedent.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Kagan asked what would happen if Congress specified nineteen cases.

Justice Kennedy asked if the principle applies to nineteen cases or three unrelated cases.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the limits of congressional power over pending litigation. It determines whether Congress can target specific lawsuits with new laws.

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