October Term 2023 · Docket 22-846

Does the Fair Credit Reporting Act waive federal sovereign immunity?

The dispute centers on whether federal agencies face civil liability for violating credit reporting laws.

Official caption
Dept. of Agric. Rural Dev. v. Kirtz
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

    Benjamin Snyder argued Congress did not unambiguously waive sovereign immunity in 1996.

    Joshi argued the Fair Credit Reporting Act expressly defines person to include government agencies.

    Snyder cited the clear statement rule to ensure Congress specifically considered immunity waivers.

    Joshi noted that ambiguity in similar statutes favors the government under sovereign immunity canons.

    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 tests if Congress clearly waived federal sovereign immunity in the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 6, 2023.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The government wants the Court to affirm that federal agencies retain sovereign immunity.

The individual wants the Court to hold that federal agencies face civil liability.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The government argues the statute lacks a clear statement waiving sovereign immunity.

The individual argues the statute explicitly defines persons to include government agencies.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Kagan asked if the statutory definition authorizes suits against natural persons and governments.

Justice Thomas asked why the term official is not sufficient to waive sovereign immunity.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case determines whether federal agencies face financial liability for credit reporting errors. It defines the scope of federal sovereign immunity in consumer protection law.

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