Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Wilton Rancheria v. UNITE HERE International Union
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 25-234 · judgment April 8, 2026
Before the decision, roughly the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a Ninth Circuit decision below, a petition filed soon after the judgment below, and counsel who has filed here before.
Question presented
Notwithstanding the deference afforded to arbitration awards, arbitrators lack the power to facially invalidate federal and state statutes. Similarly, courts defer to Tribal interpretation of Tribal law, as a critical element of longstanding policies upholding and safeguarding Tribal sovereignty. Does an arbitrator exceed his authority when he facially invalidates a duly-enacted Tribal law, especially when a court would not do so and when he would not be permitted to invalidate a duly-enacted federal or state statute?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Michael Dominic Meuti
Benesch Friedlander Coplan & Aronoff LLP
For respondent
Kristin L. Martin
McCracken, Stemerman & Holsberry, LLC
Case
Subject area
Unions (estimated from the questions presented, in the Supreme Court Database’s categories)
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Order
Order list, October 5, 2026 · Certiorari denied
Proceedings
- Oct 05 2026Petition DENIED.
- Jul 22 2026DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/28/2026.
- Jul 10 2026Waiver of right of respondent UNITE HERE International Union to respond filed.
- Jul 07 2026Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 10, 2026)