Felker v. Turpin

Ellis Felker argued that new limits in the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 on second or successive habeas corpus petitions were unconstitutional. The Supreme Court unanimously rejected that challenge and said the law did not suspend the habeas writ or strip the Court's original jurisdiction.

The Court ruled 9-0 to affirm. Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote the opinion, joined by Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy, Souter, Thomas, Ginsburg, and Breyer.

“The Act did not unconstitutionally suspend the writ of habeas corpus or strip the Court's original jurisdiction.”

The decision kept new federal limits on repeat habeas petitions in place. For example, a prisoner who already filed one habeas case must first clear an appellate screening panel before trying again.

The case ended at the Supreme Court with the lower-court result affirmed. In practice, the Act's screening rules continued to govern later second or successive habeas petitions.

The Court unanimously upheld AEDPA's limits on second or successive habeas petitions. It said the law did not suspend habeas corpus or erase the Court's original role.

Prisoners trying to file a second federal habeas challenge are most affected. They must first get permission from a federal appeals panel before moving ahead.

Nothing further was scheduled in this Supreme Court case. The decision kept the federal screening rules in place for later habeas filings.