Margolin v. NAIJ

608 U. S. 339 (2026) · 5/26/26

The Fourth Circuit’s decision to vacate and remand based on an issue the parties had not raised in the District Court violated the principle of party presentation, and its judgment is reversed.

In October 2021, the Executive Office for Immigration Review implemented a rule requiring immigration judges to obtain supervisory approval for public speeches relating to their official duties. An association of such judges (respondent here) challenged the policy in federal district court, asserting violations of its members' First and Fifth Amendment rights. The District Court held that respondent's challenge must proceed through the administrative review scheme established by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA), 92 Stat. 1122, 1125, 5 U. S. C. §§ 1205, 1206. But the Fourth Circuit…

Held: The Fourth Circuit violated the party-presentation principle when it decided a question much broader than the one respondent advanced. Federal courts adhere to the principle of party presentation—the “rule that points not argued will not be considered.” United States v. Burke, 504 U. S. 229, 246 (Scalia, J., concurring in judgment). As respondent conceded below, this Court has held that Congress intended federal employees to bring most work-related grievances to the Merit Systems Protection Board and the Special Counsel—not to federal district court. Respondent argued only that the…