October Term 2020 · Docket 19-1442

Must claimants raise ALJ appointment flaws before the agency?

the sides that brought the case seek judicial review of ALJ appointment flaws. The government demands prior agency exhaustion.

Official caption
Carr v. Saul
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

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

    Ms. Harris argued claimants do not need to challenge ALJ appointments before the agency.

    Mr. Raynor argued claimants forfeit issues not raised during agency proceedings.

    Justice Alito asked how the government accounts for wasted time and money.

    Justice Alito suggested ALJs should reconsider cases under their new appointment status.

    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

This case tests whether Social Security claimants must challenge ALJ appointment flaws before the agency. the sides that brought the case argue they can raise this issue in district court. The government argues claimants must raise it during agency proceedings.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 3, 2021.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the sides that brought the case want to raise ALJ appointment flaws in district court.

The government wants claimants to raise these flaws before the agency.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the sides that brought the case argue claimants need not exhaust this issue before the agency.

The government argues claimants forfeit issues not raised during agency proceedings.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Chief Justice Roberts asked if the ALJ hearing is the first step for all issues.

Chief Justice Roberts asked what prevents claimants from raising new injuries in district court.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This dispute determines whether claimants can challenge ALJ appointments in court. It affects the efficiency of the Social Security system. It impacts taxpayer resources and claimant wait times.

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

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

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

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

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

Download this sanitized case as JSON