Plain-English summary
Court rules courts decide whether a later contract overrides an earlier delegation to an arbitrator
The Supreme Court unanimously held that when parties sign two contracts—one that delegates arbitrability to an arbitrator and a later one that is silent or points to court decision-making—a court must determine which contract governs. The Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit’s ruling for the respondents.
Why this matters
The decision clarifies who decides who decides disputes about arbitration when parties sign multiple contracts with inconsistent or silent terms on arbitration and delegation. That matters for businesses and consumers who sign updated terms, employers and employees, and courts nationwide because it sets a clearer rule about whether arbitrability questions go to judges or arbitrators.
Who may feel it
- Businesses that use layered or updated contracts (platforms, employers, service providers)
- Consumers and employees who sign terms of service or employment agreements that change over time
- Arbitrators and arbitration providers
- Federal and state courts resolving contract and arbitration disputes
- Litigants involved in contract-based arbitration fights
Key questions
- When parties have an earlier contract delegating arbitrability and later sign a second contract that is silent about arbitration or delegation, should a court or an arbitrator decide whether the earlier delegation still controls?