No. 25-1349October Term 2025Before Arguments
Roxane M. Marschner, Petitioner v. Richard A. Marschner
from the Supreme Court of North Dakota.
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 Supreme Court of North Dakota.
Question presented
Does the USFSPA require state courts to refuse enforcement of indemnification provisions in divorce settlement agreements?
- Case path
Supreme Court of North Dakota / Accepted by the Court
- Area
Supreme Court case awaiting argument
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 case asks whether the Uniformed Services Former Spouses’ Protection Act, or USFSPA, requires state courts to refuse enforcement of divorce-settlement clauses that replace lost military retirement pay. The North Dakota Supreme Court said federal law preempted (overrode) a state order requiring that kind of payment after her share of his retirement pay was reduced.
Argument
No oral argument has been scheduled. The petition asks the Court whether USFSPA bars state courts from enforcing these make-whole provisions in divorce settlements.
Impact
The answer could affect many military divorces, especially when a settlement was built around retirement pay. For example, a former spouse could lose expected income if disability-related pay reduces the divisible retirement share.
What is the Supreme Court being asked to decide in Marschner?
It is being asked whether USFSPA requires state courts to refuse divorce clauses that replace lost military retirement payments. The fight is over whether federal law overrides those agreements.
Who could be affected if military retirement payments change after divorce?
Divorced service members and former spouses could both be affected. A former spouse may lose expected income, while the veteran may face or avoid a make-up payment.
What happens next in Marschner v. Marschner?
The case is still pending, and oral argument has not been scheduled. Watch for the Court's next scheduling move and any decision on whether to move the case forward.
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