Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1164_7li8.pdf
Page Number: 6.0

Cite as:  598 U. S. ____ (2023) 

3 

Opinion of the Court 

596 U. S. ___ (2022), and now reverses the Ninth Circuit’s 
judgment. 

II 
A 
“Jurisdiction, this Court has observed, is a word of many,
too many, meanings.”  Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U. S. 
500, 510 (2006) (internal quotation marks omitted).  In par-
ticular, this Court has emphasized the distinction between 
limits  on  “the  classes  of  cases  a  court  may  entertain
(subject-matter jurisdiction)” and “nonjurisdictional claim-
processing  rules,  which  seek  to  promote  the  orderly  pro-
gress of litigation by requiring that the parties take certain
procedural  steps  at  certain  specified  times.”  Fort  Bend 
County v. Davis, 587 U. S. ___, ___–___ (2019) (slip op., at 
6–7) (internal quotation marks omitted).  The latter cate-
gory generally includes a range of “threshold requirements 
that  claimants  must  complete,  or  exhaust,  before  filing  a 
lawsuit.”  Reed  Elsevier,  Inc.  v.  Muchnick,  559  U. S.  154, 
166 (2010).

To police this jurisdictional line, this Court will “treat a
procedural  requirement  as  jurisdictional  only  if  Congress
‘clearly  states’  that  it  is.”  Boechler  v.  Commissioner,  596 
U. S. ___, ___ (2022) (slip op., at 3) (quoting Arbaugh, 546 
U. S., at 515).  This principle of construction is not a burden 
courts impose on Congress.  To the contrary, this principle 
seeks to avoid judicial interpretations that undermine Con-
gress’ judgment.  Loosely treating procedural requirements
as  jurisdictional  risks  undermining  the  very  reason  Con-
gress enacted them.

Procedural rules often “seek to promote the orderly pro-
gress of litigation” within our adversarial system.  Hender-
son v. Shinseki, 562 U. S. 428, 435 (2011).  Limits on sub-
ject-matter 
in  contrast,  have  a  unique
potential to disrupt the orderly course of litigation.  “Brand-
ing a rule as going to a court’s subject-matter jurisdiction 

jurisdiction,