October Term 2023 · Docket 22-1218
Does a federal court keep jurisdiction after staying a case for arbitration?
the sides that brought the case want a stay that preserves court control. the opposing sides want a dismissal that ends court power.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — 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.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
the sides that brought the case claim the Federal Arbitration Act requires a stay that preserves court jurisdiction.
the opposing sides claim the same statute requires a stay that ends court jurisdiction.
Justice Jackson questioned whether the statutory text supports the sides that brought the case' interpretation.
Justice Sotomayor asked if a court can dismiss a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 53-21 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 41-53 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 41-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 21-27 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 21-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-51 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 23-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 13-37 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 13-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-15
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests whether a federal court retains jurisdiction after staying a lawsuit for arbitration. the sides that brought the case argue the court must keep control. the opposing sides argue the court must release control.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 13-37 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 13-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-31
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 22, 2024.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the court to keep jurisdiction during arbitration.
the opposing sides want the court to lose jurisdiction during arbitration.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 13-37 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 13-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-31
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the statute mandates a stay that preserves court power.
the opposing sides argue the statute mandates a stay that ends court power.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 13-37 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 13-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-31
What the justices asked
Justice Jackson asked if the statute text supports the sides that brought the case' view.
Justice Sotomayor asked if a court can dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 53-21 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 41-53 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 41-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 21-27 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 21-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-51 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 23-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-15
Why it matters
This dispute determines whether federal courts retain administrative power during private arbitration. It affects the balance between judicial oversight and private dispute resolution.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 13-37 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 13-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-31
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 12, lines 53-21 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 41-53 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 41-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 11-13 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 11-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 21-27 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 21-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 23-51 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 23-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 35-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 35-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-37 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 27-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 27-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-15
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Verified official opinions and orders
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 13-37 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 13-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 22, lines 13-37 — Transcript, file page 22, lines 13-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-31
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.