Supreme Court Backs Bankruptcy Trustee In Time-Limited Void Challenge
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that federal courts must apply a time limit when a party seeks to challenge a judgment as void under federal procedural rules, settling a long-running dispute among lower courts.
In Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited Inc. v. Burton, the justices affirmed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit’s 2024 decision, holding that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(c)(1) requires motions to vacate even allegedly void judgments to be filed within a “reasonable time.”
The case arose after Coney Island Auto Parts, a Brooklyn-area company, sought to overturn a default judgment entered against it in 2015, arguing that it was never properly served. The bankruptcy court and federal district court denied the challenge on timeliness grounds, a ruling the Sixth Circuit upheld.
Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the court, emphasized that the plain text of Rule 60(c)(1) — which states that a motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time — applies to motions asserting that a judgment is void. Under the court’s interpretation, the rule’s structure and language foreclose treating void judgments as exempt from timing requirements.
The decision resolves a split among federal appeals courts, with most circuits holding that no time limit applies to void-judgment challenges because such judgments are legally null from the start, while only a minority of circuits, like the Sixth, requiring prompt action.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson noted during oral arguments that determining whether a judgment is truly void can be complex, and the court’s ruling leaves procedural mechanisms in place to balance finality with fairness.
The ruling is expected to influence civil litigation practice nationwide by reinforcing procedural deadlines for reopening final judgments, even when jurisdictional defects are alleged.
The Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, struck down the tariffs on Friday, ruling that Trump lacked the statutory authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to implement broad trade penalties without explicit congressional authorization.
The case has drawn significant attention as a legal rebuke of a key element of the administration’s trade policy.
Vice President JD Vance sharply criticized the Supreme Court decision, calling the ruling “lawlessness” in a social media post on Friday.
In a post on X, Vance said the court’s interpretation “decided that Congress, despite giving the president the ability to ‘regulate imports,’ didn’t actually mean it,” and described the ruling as “lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple.”
“And its only effect will be to make it harder for the president to protect American industries and supply chain resiliency.”
He added, “President Trump has a wide range of other tariff powers, and he will use them to defend American workers and advance this administration’s trade priorities.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling marked a setback for the administration’s signature tariff strategy, which had aimed to address trade imbalances and strengthen domestic production.
Trump responded to the decision by criticizing the court and signaling plans to pursue alternative legal avenues for trade measures.
The tariffs had targeted goods from a broad range of U.S. trading partners and were central to the White House’s economic agenda. The ruling upheld the constitutional principle that significant tariff authority lies with Congress, according to the court’s majority opinion.
Trump stated that the ruling still provided his administration considerable latitude to increase tariffs using other authorities, referencing a line he credited to Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s dissent.
George Washington University Law School professor and legal scholar Jonathan Turley agreed that this isn’t over.
The administration can still impose tariffs through other statutes.
“The administration has other tools in its toolbox. It can actually impose tariffs under other statutes,” Turley said, adding that there’s plenty of runway for the Trump White House in this area of economic policy.
Breaking, PAM BONDI discloses that she has been diagnosed with…
____BY 118_____
Steve Yates discusses Pam Bondi's contributions after her removal as attorney general
Steve Yates, former deputy national security advisor for Vice President Cheney, reflects on Attorney General Pam Bondi's significant contributions, especially in fighting illicit fentanyl and advocating for victims.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Former Attorney General Pam Bondi was diagnosed with thyroid cancer shortly after departing the Department of Justice last month, according to a report.
Bondi, 60, who left her role at the Justice Department in early April, underwent treatment and is recovering, a source told Axios.
Katie Miller, a former White House staffer and podcast host who is married to White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller, reposted the report on X on Tuesday.
"Pam has been quietly kicking cancer's ass the last few weeks," she wrote.
PAM BONDI CANCELS APPEARANCE AT ANTI-TRAFFICKING SUMMIT OVER MEDICAL ISSUE
Attorney General Pam Bondi takes her seat before testifying at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on oversight of the Department of Justice on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 11, 2026. (Roberto Schmidt/AFP)
She added that Bondi has "a heart of gold."
Axios disclosed the health update while reporting that Bondi has been appointed by President Donald Trump to an advisory committee focused on artificial intelligence policy.
The White House confirmed to Fox News Digital that Bondi will serve on the Presidential Council of Advisors on Science and Technology.
"Pam has been an enormously valuable asset to the president's team, and I'm thrilled for her and for all of us that she's going to remain involved in confronting some of the most important issues the administration faces," Vice President JD Vance said in a statement.
AG PAM BONDI SUGGESTS TRUMP'S CRIME CRACKDOWN IN DC WILL HELP LATINO RESIDENTS
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 7, 2025. (Win McNamee/Getty Images)
The council is co-chaired by White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks and White House science advisor Michael Kratsios.
Bondi will reportedly help facilitate coordination between the federal government and technology executives serving on the panel.
News of Bondi’s diagnosis and new advisory role comes weeks after Trump removed her as attorney general.
KARL ROVE: TRUMP DROPPED BONDI, BUT THE REAL POLITICAL FIGHT IS JUST BEGINNING
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche attends a news conference at the Justice Department in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 19, 2025. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
In a Truth Social post announcing her departure, Trump described Bondi as "a Great American Patriot and a loyal friend."
"Pam did a tremendous job overseeing a massive crackdown in Crime across our Country, with Murders plummeting to their lowest level since 1900," Trump wrote. "We love Pam, and she will be transitioning to a much needed and important new job in the private sector, to be announced at a date in the near future."
Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche has served as acting attorney general since Bondi’s departure.
BLANCHE INVOKES TRUMP ‘LOVE’ WHEN ASKED ABOUT STAYING ON AFTER BONDI
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi speaks as President Donald Trump looks on during a news conference in the Oval Office of the White House on Oct. 15, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
In a post on X confirming her exit from the Justice Department, Bondi said she remains "eternally grateful for the trust that President Trump placed in me to Make America Safe Again."
"Over the next month I will be working tirelessly to transition the office of Attorney General to the amazing Todd Blanche before moving to an important private sector role I am thrilled about, and where I will continue fighting for President Trump and this Administration," Bondi wrote.
"Leading President Trump’s historic and highly successful efforts to make America safer and more secure has been the honor of a lifetime, and easily the most consequential first year of the Department of Justice in American history."
Judge Tosses Wolff Suit, Clearing Path For $1B Melania Claim
Wolff filed suit against Trump seeking to block her from suing him for $1 billion for alleged defamatory claims he made regarding her association with Jeffrey Epstein.
“It’s an inappropriate level of tactical gamesmanship,” said Manhattan Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil, an appointee of President Donald Trump.
Vyskocil said she would not be “drafted to oversee an abusively presented spat,” yet she recognized that both sides have a “real dispute.”
Last year, the first lady’s lawyer issued Wolff a letter demanding he delete the statements he made about Trump and threatening that she would have “no alternative” but to sue him if he didn’t.
That spurred him to sue her in state court in October.
Trump’s lawyer, Alejandro Brito, had the complaint moved to federal court, where Vyskocil declared that while federal court does have jurisdiction, she was declining to exercise it and “dismisses this case to be litigated like any other.”
A Melania Trump spokesperson said that the first lady “is proud to continue standing up to, and fighting against, those who spread malicious and defamatory falsehoods as they desperately try to get undeserved attention and money from their unlawful conduct.”
The 56-year-old’s lawyer previously claimed that Wolff’s statements caused her “overwhelming reputational and financial harm.”
The first lady has denied any association with Epstein, who died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of child sex trafficking.
“The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today,” the first lady said in an April press conference.
“The individuals lying about me are devoid of ethical standards, humility, and respect. I do not object to their ignorance, but rather I reject their mean-spirited attempts to defame my reputation,” she added at the time.
Wolff claimed in his lawsuit that the president and first lady “have made a practice of threatening those who speak against them” with costly legal actions “to silence their speech, to intimidate their critics generally, and to extract unjustified payments and North Korean-style confessions and apologies.”
He added that some of his statements were taken out of context and some were protected speech, including a statement he made that claimed the Trumps have a “sham marriage, trophy marriage,” that his lawsuit says was a “fair and justified” opinion.
It also said in his lawsuit that Wolff never accused the first lady of being involved with criminal activity associated with Epstein.
The Daily Beast retracted an article last summer, titled “Melania Trump ‘Very Involved’ in Epstein Scandal: Author,” which was based on an interview with Wolff, after the outlet received a letter from Brito.
In the interview that formed the basis for the retracted piece, Wolff said he reported that the first lady was “behind the scenes” dealing with the situation at the White House, but was not involved criminally.
Republican Rep. Nancy Mace praised Melania Trump at the time for coming out against Epstein.
“Melania Trump stands with Epstein victims,” Mace said, citing the first lady’s advocacy for legislation addressing the distribution of fake intimate images. “The truth will prevail.”
Democratic lawmakers also commented following the statement.
Rep. Robert Garcia called for a public hearing, writing, “We agree with First Lady Melania Trump’s call for a public hearing,” Garcia said. “We encourage Chairman Comer to schedule a hearing immediately.”
Garcia said the remarks renewed attention on the broader investigation.
In her remarks, Melania Trump called on Congress to take action.
“Now is the time for Congress to act,” she said.
She urged lawmakers to allow victims to testify under oath.
This article may contain commentary which reflects the author’s opinion.
