Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited, Inc. v. Burton · ¶28

I concur in the judgment because the majority unnecessarily opines on the potential validity of a constitutional challenge to the “reasonable time” limit under the Due Process Clause. Ante, at 159. Coney Island did not make this argument below and the Sixth Circuit did not pass upon it. See In re Vista-Pro Automotive, LLC, 109 F. 4th 438, 443 (2024) (“Coney Island does not mount a constitutional attack on Rule 60”). In this Court, Coney Island expressly disclaimed any due process argument. See Brief for Petitioner 22 (“To be clear, Coney Island does not contend that Rule 60 or Rule 60(c)(1) [is] unconstitutional”). This Court does “not generally entertain arguments that were not raised below and are not advanced in this Court by any party.” Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U. S. 682, 721 (2014). There is no reason to depart from that practice absent unusual circumstances, which…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.