Harrow v. Department of Defense
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Harrow v. Department of Defense and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Harrow v. Department of Defense.
In Harrow v. Department of Defense, the Supreme Court addressed whether the 60-day filing deadline for appeals from the Merit Systems Protection Board is jurisdictional. The Court concluded that this deadline is not jurisdictional, allowing for exceptions such as equitable tolling. The decision vacated and remanded the lower court's ruling.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Harrow v. Department of Defense.
The Court held that Section 7703(b)(1)'s 60-day filing deadline is not jurisdictional, allowing for exceptions like equitable tolling.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Harrow v. Department of Defense. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Harrow v. Department of Defense
The case involves whether the procedural rules regarding filing deadlines are jurisdictional, which implicates procedural due process concerns.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Although the procedural rules that govern the litigation process are often phrased in mandatory terms, they are generally subject to exceptions like waiver, forfeiture, and equitable tolling.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Harrow v. Department of Defense
The Court's decision involves the power of courts to interpret statutory requirements and determine their jurisdictional nature.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Court will 'treat a procedural requirement as jurisdictional only if Congress `clearly states' that it is.'
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Harrow v. Department of Defense that support the summary and concepts above.
"Section 7703(b)(1)'s 60-day filing deadline is not jurisdictional."
"What matters instead is whether the time bar speaks to the court's jurisdiction."
"The Government's interpretation would suggest that all those rules are jurisdictional too."