The Supreme Court on Tuesday held in Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton that litigants do not have unlimited time to challenge judgments as void. Rather, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) places a “reasonable-time limit” on such motions, wrote Justice Samuel Alito in the majority opinion.

We were live as the court released its opinions in Berk v. Choy, Ellingburg v. United States, and Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton.

In Barrett v. United States, the court held in an opinion by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson that the Constitution’s double jeopardy clause prohibits a defendant from receiving two convictions for a single act that violates two closely related federal firearm offenses, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i) and 18 U.S.C. § 924(j).

Major Questions is a recurring series by Adam White, which analyzes the court’s approach to administrative law, agencies, and the lower courts.

Like the still-pending tariffs case, Wednesday’s oral arguments in Trump v. Cook will attract attention far beyond the usual court-watchers. The president’s attempt to fire a Federal Reserve governor raises enormous questions for global markets and American law – all the more so after the latest news of a Justice Department investigation of Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, and Powell’s denunciation of it. When the justices gather to hear oral arguments, the world will be watching.

But what, exactly, will we be watching?

The Supreme Court on Friday afternoon added four new cases, on topics ranging from the Fourth Amendment to federal preemption, to its Oral Argument Docket for the 2025-26 term. The announcement came as part of a list of orders released from the justices’ private conference earlier in the day.