October Term 2020 · Docket 19-199
Can courts review Railroad Retirement Board denials to reopen benefits?
the sides that brought the case seek judicial review of a Board denial to reopen benefits. The government argues such denials lack statutory reviewability.
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
Ms. Harris argued that Section 355(f) requires judicial review of all final Board decisions.
Mr. Raynor argued that statutory text limits review to specific rights and liabilities, excluding reopening denials.
chief_justice_roberts_noted that statutory violations are not automatically constitutional violations.
Justice Alito asked if the Court could decide the case by looking only at Section 231g language.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 14-28 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 14-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 16-48 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 16-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 30-38 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 30-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 36-48 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 36-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 16-40 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 16-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 16-48 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 16-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 10-44 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 10-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 10-20 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 10-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-8 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 10-42 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 10-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 48-8 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 48-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 8-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 8-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 36-46 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 36-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 18-28 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 18-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 44-54 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 44-54
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The dispute centers on whether federal courts can review a Railroad Retirement Board decision refusing to reopen a prior benefits determination. the sides that brought the case argue the statute mandates review of all final Board decisions. The government contends the statute limits review to specific rights and liabilities, excluding procedural reopening denials.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 10-44 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 10-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-8 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-8
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 2, 2020.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 10-20 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 10-20
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to allow judicial review of the Board's denial to reopen benefits.
The government wants the Court to bar judicial review of the Board's denial to reopen benefits.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 10-44 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 10-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-8 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-8
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue Section 355(f) subjects all final Board decisions to judicial review, including reopening denials.
The government argues the statute limits review to specific rights and liabilities, excluding procedural reopening denials.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 10-44 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 10-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-8 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-8
What the justices asked
Justice Breyer asked how the statutory language of rights and liabilities applies to this case.
Justice Thomas asked how the argument applies if the case involved state law issues instead of federal law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 14-28 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 14-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 16-48 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 16-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 30-38 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 30-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 36-48 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 36-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 16-40 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 16-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 16-48 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 16-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 10-42 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 10-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 48-8 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 48-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 8-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 8-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 36-46 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 36-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 18-28 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 18-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 44-54 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 44-54
Why it matters
This case determines whether federal courts can correct errors in Railroad Retirement Board procedures. It defines the scope of judicial oversight over federal benefits agencies. It affects the ability of beneficiaries to challenge agency decisions in court.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 10-44 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 10-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-8 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-8
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 14-28 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 14-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 16-48 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 16-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 30-38 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 30-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 36-48 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 36-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 16-40 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 16-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 16-48 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 16-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 10-20 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 10-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 10-42 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 10-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 48-8 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 48-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 8-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 8-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 36-46 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 36-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 18-28 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 18-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 44-54 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 44-54
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 37, lines 10-44 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 10-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-8 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 10-44 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 10-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 22-8 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 22-8
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.