October Term 2023 · Docket 23-3

Who decides if a crypto user must arbitrate?

Coinbase wants a judge to enforce its arbitration clause. Suski wants a judge to decide if that clause applies.

Official caption
Coinbase, Inc. v. Suski
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 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. Ellsworth argued the Federal Arbitration Act requires enforcing the agreement.

    Mr. Harris argued the parties fight due to strategic reasons.

    questions_asked_by_justices

    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

Coinbase argues the Federal Arbitration Act mandates enforcing its arbitration agreement. Suski argues the agreement lacks clarity. The Court must decide who resolves this threshold dispute.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 28, 2024.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Coinbase wants a judge to enforce the arbitration agreement.

Suski wants a judge to decide if the agreement applies.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Coinbase argues the Federal Arbitration Act requires enforcing the agreement.

Suski argues the agreement creates confusion about its scope.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Thomas asked if the rules create a valid arbitration agreement.

Justice Kavanaugh asked if the Court should remand the case to the Ninth Circuit.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines who decides if a user must arbitrate. It affects how courts handle ambiguous arbitration clauses. It shapes the balance between judicial review and private arbitration.

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