Appeals of agency subpoenas
McLane v. EEOC
In brief
The Court set a deferential review rule for EEOC subpoena disputes and wiped out the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, sending the case back for another look.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 7-1 · April 3, 2017 · Opinion by Justice Sotomayor
- What it’s about
- During its investigation of Damiana Ochoa’s charge against her former employer, McLane, the EEOC sought to enforce a subpoena.
- Who it affects
- Appeals courts reviewing trial judges’ EEOC subpoena decisions must give those judges leeway instead of deciding the subpoena question from scratch.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court said appeals courts must review district judges’ subpoena decisions deferentially under the abuse-of-discretion standard, not decide them anew; it wiped out the Ninth Circuit’s ruling (vacated it) and sent the case back (remanded) because that court used the wrong standard.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sought to enforce a subpoena while investigating Damiana Ochoa’s charge against her former employer, McLane.
The dispute reached the Supreme Court after the Ninth Circuit reviewed a trial judge’s refusal to enforce the EEOC subpoena.
Question presented
Should a district court’s determination on whether to enforce an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission subpoena be reviewed “de novo,” or without deference to the lower court’s determination?
What the Court decided
Holding
A district court’s decision whether to enforce or quash an EEOC subpoena should be reviewed for abuse of discretion, not de novo. 804 F. 3d 1051, vacated and remanded.
- Result
- Vacated
The Court's reasoning
The Ninth Circuit used the wrong review standard, so the Court returned the case for that appeals court to reconsider.
The vote
From the opinions
“While I agree with the Court that “abuse of discretion” is generally the proper review standard for district court decisions reviewing agency subpoenas, I would nevertheless affirm the Ninth Circuit’s judgment in this case.”
What's next
The Ninth Circuit must reconsider the trial judge’s subpoena decision under the abuse-of-discretion standard. The Supreme Court did not decide whether the subpoena should be enforced.
Documents
Opinions
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
Show 4 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Opinion added: Opinion
More questions
- Why did Justice Ginsburg favor keeping the Ninth Circuit’s ruling?
- She said the trial judge wrongly required the EEOC to show it needed the information at that point; she said showing the information was relevant was enough.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.