1991—By a vote of 6 to 3, the Supreme Court rules (in Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co.) that a private litigant in a civil case violates the equal-protection rights of a potential juror when the litigant excludes the juror on account of race. The Court further rules that the opposing party has standing to assert the excluded juror’s equal-protection claim.
In dissent (joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Scalia), Justice O’Connor explains that “a peremptory strike by a private litigant is fundamentally a matter of private choice and not state action.”
2025—Having been in her judicial robe for barely a year, Fourth Circuit judge Nicole Berner is evidently determined to bolster the Fourth Circuit’s claim to being even less restrained than the Ninth Circuit. Joined by fellow liberals Pamela Harris and Toby Heytens, the Biden appointee rules (in National Association of Immigration Judges v. Owen) that the plaintiff government employees might not need to pursue the statutory scheme for administrative and judicial review of covered federal employee personnel actions because “serious questions have recently arisen regarding the functioning of both the MSPB [Merit Systems Protection Board] and the Special Counsel.” Never mind that the plaintiffs in the case did not make such an argument. On that ground, the panel directs the district court to reconsider its conclusion that it did not have jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claims.
In May 2026, the Supreme Court, with no registered dissent, will summarily reverse the Fourth Circuit (in Margolin v. National Association of Immigration Judges). By ruling “based on an issue the parties had not raised,” the Fourth Circuit “violated the principle of party presentation.” It “lost sight” of the elementary principle that “federal courts are not roving commissions licensed to sally forth each day looking for wrongs to right.” (Cleaned up.)