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.
