No. 22-714October Term 2022Decided May 22, 2023
Calcutt v. FDIC
The Supreme Court ruled that when a federal agency makes a legal error, an appeals court must send the case back to the agency rather than reviewing the factual record itself.
Case status
- Current stage
- Decided
- Latest event
- Decision released May 22, 2023
- What it's about
The Supreme Court ruled that when a federal agency makes a legal error, an appeals court must send the case back to the agency rather than reviewing the factual record itself. This decision reversed a lower court's attempt to uphold FDIC sanctions against a former bank CEO using its own legal rationale.
Question presented
1. Whether, when a court of appeals identifies a legal error in an agency’s decision, the proper remedy is to remand to the agency for further proceedings, or whether the court may instead conduct its own de novo review of the record and reach its own factual findings to support the agency’s decision. 2. Whether the separation-of-powers concerns identified in Seila Law LLC v. CFPB, 140 S. Ct. 2183 (2020), and Collins v. Yellen, 141 S. Ct. 1761 (2021), require a court to vacate an agency action taken by an official who is unconstitutionally insulated from presidential removal, without a showing that the removal restriction caused the specific harm of which the party complains.
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit / Decision released May 22, 2023
- Area
Administrative Law, Immigration
Documents
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary-source trail available.
- Note
- Plain-English explainer. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Mar 31, 2026
- Method
- Methodology