Will Baude

So I think the way the case was framed was pretty simple.

And in a blog post at some point after the argument, I tried to flag sort of the three questions that were arguably outside of frame, which are, is this time limit unconstitutional?

Is there another way to attack boy judgments?

And what is a reasonable time?

Which are all kind of bigger questions.

The court resolves the first question.

The court gets into the constitutional question.

Ish.

Ish.

And they say that Justice Sotomayor writes separately to say, I don't even think we need to resolve the constitutional question.

The majority says, well, look, we've got to resolve something.

The only possible basis for this argument is a constitutional argument.

Yeah.

So even though the petitioner didn't really raise it, we got to say something.

And doesn't resolve what is a reasonable time or are there other ways to attack or disregard avoid judgment outside of this process?

What I think is actually the most important question.

And in footnote five, the court reserves that and just says, rule 60D preserves parties' ability to obtain relief from a judgment in limited ways other than through a rule 60B motion.

We express no view regarding the limits applicable to obtaining relief through one of those methods, nor does the court actually state what they are.

So that, I think, is the

You know, that's the biggest area where, you know, there'll be left to litigate later.