Head-to-head
Lina Noland, et al., Petitioners v. Federal Trade Commission vs. Sualeh Kamal Ashraf, Petitioner v. Drug Enforcement Administration vs. Diana Zuniga Kammunkun, Petitioner v. Department of Defense
Administrative Law cases on the Supreme Court docket, side by side.
The matchup
Docket 25-1403Lina Noland, et al., Petitioners v. Federal Trade CommissionBefore argumentOctober Term 2025Docket 25-7384Sualeh Kamal Ashraf, Petitioner v. Drug Enforcement AdministrationBefore argumentOctober Term 2025Docket 25-7612Diana Zuniga Kammunkun, Petitioner v. Department of DefenseBefore argumentOctober Term 2025
Relationship
- Shared issue
- Administrative Law
- Why compared
- Reviewed Administrative Law tags connect these current-term public cases.
Questions presented
- Lina Noland, et al., Petitioners v. Federal Trade Commission
- 1. Whether, after AMG Capital Management, LLC v. FTC and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Federal Trade Commission may preserve an ex parte Section 13(b) asset freeze and receivership and obtain a revenue-based, multi-million-dollar monetary judgment through civil contempt where the judgment functions as restitution or disgorgement, is not tied to identified sustained losses, and the only rule-violation damages awarded under Section 19 were $6,829. 2. Whether the Seventh Amendment and due process permit a federal agency to obtain a $7,306,873.14 revenue-based monetary sanction, labeled civil compensatory contempt, through a bench proceeding where the sanction operates as a legal money judgment rather than compensation for proven individualized losses and where the ex parte freeze impaired Petitioners' ability to fund and preserve a jury defense.
- Sualeh Kamal Ashraf, Petitioner v. Drug Enforcement Administration
- 1. Whether, after Ruan v. United States, 597 U.S. 450 (2022), the Controlled Substances Act permits the Drug Enforcement Administration to revoke a physician’s registration—and a court of appeals to affirm that revocation—without any finding that the physician knowingly or intentionally violated the Act? 2. Whether due process permits an agency and a reviewing court to sustain the revocation of a professional license where the respondent demonstrates that material evidence relied upon by the agency was false or unreliable, and the court declines to address that showing? 3. Whether the Eleventh Circuit’s categorical refusal to apply Ruan’s mens rea requirement to administrative revocation proceedings conflicts with this Court’s interpretation of the Controlled Substances Act and creates an incentive for the government to bypass criminal safeguards by proceeding administratively?
- Diana Zuniga Kammunkun, Petitioner v. Department of Defense
- 1. Whether the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of due process permits an agency official to materially revise investigative findings after the investigative process has concluded, direct adverse action based upon those revised findings, and then serve as final adjudicator of the employee's response to those revised findings? 2. Whether an appellate court may affirm rejection of a federal employee's due process claim by resolving a materially different legal question than the constitutional issue actually presented for review?
Go deeper
Sources
- Built from reviewed issue tags and official docket records. Status lines and questions presented come from the tracked case data.