Siegel v. Fitzgerald
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Siegel v. Fitzgerald and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Siegel v. Fitzgerald.
The Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of a 2017 fee increase for Chapter 11 debtors, which applied differently across states. The fee increase was challenged for violating the Bankruptcy Clause's uniformity requirement. The Court found that exempting debtors in two states from the fee increase was unconstitutional.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Siegel v. Fitzgerald.
The Court held that Congress' enactment of a significant fee increase that exempted debtors in two states violated the uniformity requirement of the Bankruptcy Clause.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Siegel v. Fitzgerald. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Necessary and Proper Clause is relevant to Siegel v. Fitzgerald
The Court addressed whether the 2017 Act was a law on the subject of bankruptcies or enacted under the Necessary and Proper Clause.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Respondent contends that the 2017 Act was not a law 'on the subject of Bankruptcies' to which the uniformity requirement applies, but instead a law enacted pursuant to the Necessary and Proper Clause, Art. I, § 8, cl. 18, meant to help administer substantive bankruptcy law.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Siegel v. Fitzgerald
The Court reviewed and invalidated a congressional act based on its non-compliance with the Bankruptcy Clause's uniformity requirement.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Held: Congress' enactment of a significant fee increase that exempted debtors in two States violated the uniformity requirement of the Bankruptcy Clause.
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to Siegel v. Fitzgerald
The case involves the allocation of authority between federal bankruptcy laws and their application across different states.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The Clause does not permit Congress to treat identical debtors differently based on artificial distinctions Congress itself created.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Siegel v. Fitzgerald that support the summary and concepts above.
Congress' enactment of a significant fee increase that exempted debtors in two States violated the uniformity requirement of the Bankruptcy Clause.
The 2017 Act does not confer discretion on bankruptcy districts to set regional policies based on regional needs.
The Clause does not permit Congress to treat identical debtors differently based on artificial distinctions Congress itself created.
