Lomax v. Ortiz-Marquez
In brief
The Court upheld the Tenth Circuit’s ruling: throwing out a prisoner’s lawsuit for failing to state a legal claim counts as a strike, even if the prisoner may file again.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 9-0 · June 8, 2020 · Opinion by Justice Kagan
- What it’s about
- The Supreme Court ruled that a lawsuit dismissed without prejudice for failing to state a claim counts as a strike under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.
- Who it affects
- After three qualifying cases are thrown out, the PLRA’s three-strikes rule can require a prisoner to pay filing fees before bringing another federal civil lawsuit.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
This three-strikes rule prevents inmates from filing federal civil lawsuits without paying filing fees if they have three prior qualifying dismissals.
The case interprets the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), a federal law that limits prisoners’ ability to file civil lawsuits without paying filing fees.
Question presented
Does a dismissal without prejudice for failure to state a claim count as a strike under the Prison Litigation Reform Act?
What the Court decided
Holding
Section 1915(g)’s three-strikes provision refers to any dismissal for failure to state a claim, whether with prejudice or without. This case begins, and pretty much ends, with Section 1915(g)’s text. The provision’s broad language covers all dismissals for failure to state a claim, whether issued with or without prejudice to a plaintiff’s ability to reassert his claim in a later action. A strike-call under Section 1915(g) thus hinges exclusively on the basis for the dismissal, regardless of the decision’s prejudicial effect. 756, affirmed.
- Result
- Affirmed
The vote
What's next
The Supreme Court has finished its action in the case, and the Tenth Circuit’s ruling remains in place. The three-strikes rule treats each case thrown out for failing to state a legal claim as a strike, even if the prisoner may file again.
Why it matters
The Court said the reason for throwing out the case controls, not whether the prisoner may file again.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
New analysis added
Opinion added: opinion
Show 2 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
Brief added: Questions Presented
More questions
- What did Lomax v. Ortiz-Marquez decide?
- The Supreme Court upheld the Tenth Circuit’s ruling. It said a lawsuit thrown out for not stating a legal claim counts as a strike, even if the prisoner may file again.
- How does the ruling affect the PLRA’s three-strikes rule?
- After three qualifying cases are thrown out, a prisoner may have to pay filing fees before filing another federal civil lawsuit. Each such case still counts even if the claim may be filed again.
- What happens next in Lomax v. Ortiz-Marquez?
- The Supreme Court has finished its action, and the Tenth Circuit’s ruling remains in place. The rule treats each case thrown out for not stating a legal claim as a strike, even if the claim may be filed again.
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.