Coinbase v. Suski
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Coinbase v. Suski 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 Coinbase v. Suski.
The Supreme Court addressed a conflict between two contracts involving Coinbase and its users. The User Agreement contained an arbitration provision, while the Sweepstakes Rules had a forum selection clause. The Court determined that when parties have conflicting contracts regarding arbitrability, a court must decide which contract governs.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Coinbase v. Suski.
The Court held that a court must decide which contract governs when parties have conflicting agreements on arbitrability.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Coinbase v. Suski. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Coinbase v. Suski
The Court's decision involves determining which of the two conflicting contracts governs the dispute, which is an exercise of judicial review.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Where parties have agreed to two contracts—one sending arbitrability disputes to arbitration, and the other either explicitly or implicitly sending arbitrability disputes to the courts—a court must decide which contract governs.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Coinbase v. Suski
The case involves procedural questions about which forum has jurisdiction to resolve the dispute, implicating procedural due process concerns.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The District Court determined that the Official Rules' forum selection clause controlled the parties' dispute and accordingly denied the motion.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Coinbase v. Suski that support the summary and concepts above.
Where parties have agreed to two contracts—one sending arbitrability disputes to arbitration, and the other either explicitly or implicitly sending arbitrability disputes to the courts—a court must decide which contract governs.
The Federal Arbitration Act 'refects the fundamental principle that arbitration is a matter of contract.'
Regardless, where the parties have agreed to two contracts, a court must decide which contract governs.