The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that challenges to court judgments claimed to be void must still be filed within a “reasonable time,” resolving a long-standing disagreement among lower courts.
In Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited Inc. v. Burton, the Court upheld a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, confirming that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) applies to all motions seeking to set aside judgments, including those argued to be invalid. The case involved a company attempting to overturn a 2015 default judgment, claiming it had not been properly served. Lower courts denied the request as untimely.
Writing for the Court, Samuel Alito emphasized that the rule’s language requires such motions to be filed within a reasonable timeframe, even when the judgment is alleged to be void. The ruling resolves a split among federal courts, where some had previously allowed unlimited time to challenge void judgments.
In a separate decision, the Court struck down tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, ruling that Donald Trump lacked authority to enact broad trade measures without congressional approval.
Vice President JD Vance criticized the decision, calling it “lawlessness” and warning it could limit the president’s ability to protect American industries. Trump also responded, indicating his administration would explore alternative legal authorities to pursue its trade agenda.
Legal analysts, including Jonathan Turley, noted that other statutory options remain available for implementing tariffs.
