No. 25-7519October Term 2025Before Arguments
Fousseini Tounkara, Petitioner v. James Macy, Director, Office of Worker's Compensation Programs, et al.
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 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 Ninth Circuit.
Question presented
1. Whether a reviewing court may uphold an Administrative Law Judge's adverse credibility determination in a Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act case when that determination is unsupported by substantial evidence and contradicted by the preponderance of medical and testimonial proof. 2. Whether the Ninth Circuit's deference to an AU's credibility finding — despite lack of factual support and conflict with uncontroverted medical evidence — violates the Fifth Amendment and the statutory requirement that agency decisions reflect the entire record. 3. Whether a court of appeals may refuse to consider exculpatory medical and audio evidence solely because it was excluded from the administrative record where the exclusion resulted directly from the AU's procedural rulings. 4. Whether a reviewing court may affirm an administrative decision where the AU (1) denied Petitioner the right to present his case first; (2) cut off cross-examination of a vocational expert; (3) excluded a disputed allegation as "irrelevant" while still relying on it; and (4) returned Petitioner's pretrial exhibits before they could be admitted, ensuring they were not part of the record.
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit / Accepted by the Court
- Area
Administrative Law
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
Tounkara asks the Supreme Court to review a Ninth Circuit decision in a Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act case. He says the court wrongly accepted an agency judge's finding that he was not believable and ignored medical, audio, and exhibit evidence excluded after disputed hearing rulings.
Argument
The case is still at the petition stage, and no oral argument is scheduled. The petition challenges the Ninth Circuit's acceptance of the credibility finding and its refusal to consider excluded evidence.
Impact
The case could affect workers seeking federal compensation benefits when an agency judge limits evidence or cross-examination. For example, a worker who says medical records support his claim may want a court to review the full record, not just a narrowed one.
What is Tounkara v. Macy about?
The petition says the Ninth Circuit accepted an agency judge's credibility finding despite conflicting medical proof and hearing rulings that kept evidence out.
Who could be affected by Tounkara v. Macy?
Workers in federal compensation cases could be affected, especially when key medical or audio evidence is excluded during an agency hearing. The case asks how closely courts must review that kind of record.
What happens next in Tounkara v. Macy?
The justices will decide whether to grant certiorari (agree to hear the case) or deny review. No oral argument date 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