No. 25-1303October Term 2025Before Arguments
Caryn Devins Strickland, Petitioner v. Nancy L. Moritz, Judge, In Her Official Capacity as Chair of the Judicial Conference Committee on Judicial Resources, et al.
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Case status
- Current stage
- Before Arguments
- Latest event
- Accepted by the Court
- Decision timing
- No window until argument is scheduled.
- What it's about
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Question presented
1. Whether the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process and Equal Protection clauses permit the federal judiciary to require its employees to adjudicate sexual harassment and employment discrimination claims through an internal system that lacks an independent decisionmaker, meaningful procedural safeguards, and adequate remedies, rather than affording the essential protections available under Title VII. 2. Whether a circuit’s EDR Plan that does not comport with Title VII’s fundamental principles violates the Congressional Accountability Act and policy of the Judicial Conference of the United States promulgated in accordance thereto.
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit / Accepted by the Court
- Area
Civil Rights
Timing
Expected by late June 2026, if argued this term
The Court granted review but has not yet scheduled oral argument. Once argued, the median case reaches a decision in 94 days. Nearly all cases are decided by the end of the term in which they are argued.
Briefing
What it's about
This petition asks whether the Fifth Amendment allows the federal judiciary to require employees to bring sexual harassment and employment discrimination claims through its internal Employment Dispute Resolution system instead of Title VII-style protections. It also asks whether an EDR plan that falls short of those principles conflicts with the Congressional Accountability Act and Judicial Conference policy.
Argument
The case is pending, and oral argument has not been scheduled yet.
Impact
The answer could affect federal court employees who say they faced workplace discrimination or sexual harassment. For example, a court staff member may have to use an internal judiciary process rather than the fuller safeguards and remedies available to most workers under Title VII.
What is Caryn Devins Strickland v. Moritz about?
The petition asks whether federal judiciary employees can be required to use the courts' internal Employment Dispute Resolution process for harassment and discrimination claims. It also asks whether an EDR plan without basic Title VII-style safeguards violates the Fifth Amendment, the Congressional Accountability Act, and judiciary policy.
Who could be affected by Strickland v. Moritz?
Federal court employees, including people who work in chambers or court offices, could be affected. The case could shape what procedures and remedies they get when they report discrimination or sexual harassment.
What happens next in Strickland v. Moritz?
The case is still pending, and oral argument has not been scheduled. Watch for another scheduling move from the Court, including whether argument is set.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 17, 2026
- Method
- Methodology