Skip to content
Project Curia
Supreme Court decisions
No. 23-1324Jun 18, 2025Crime and Law EnforcementAffirmed

The question

Whether a party has a right to a jury trial on Prison Litigation Reform Act exhaustion when that dispute is intertwined with the merits of an underlying claim that itself carries a Seventh Amendment jury trial right.

Perttu v. Richards

What the Court decided

The Court held that parties are entitled to a jury trial on PLRA exhaustion when that issue is intertwined with the merits of a claim that requires a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment. The PLRA is silent on whether judges or juries resolve exhaustion disputes, and that silence means the usual practice under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure applies, which sends factual disputes tied to legal claims to the jury. The Court construed the PLRA to require a jury trial in Richards's case, so it did not decide whether Congress could have required otherwise.

How the justices split

5-4
In favor 5Against 4
Roberts
Sotomayor
Kagan
Gorsuch
Jackson
Barrett
Thomas
Alito
Kavanaugh

The Court's opinion

Roberts, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, Jackson

The PLRA is silent on whether judges or juries resolve exhaustion disputes, so the usual practice under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure applies and sends factual disputes tied to legal claims to the jury. Congress legislates against a background of common-law adjudicatory principles absent a contrary statutory purpose, and no such purpose is evident in the PLRA. When PLRA exhaustion is intertwined with the merits of a claim carrying a Seventh Amendment jury trial right, that exhaustion question goes to the jury, and courts should structure their order of operations to preserve the jury trial right. Construing the statute this way avoids deciding whether Congress could have required otherwise.

Dissenting

Barrett, joined by Thomas, Alito, Kavanaugh

The dissent disagreed with the majority's construction of the PLRA and its conclusion that PLRA exhaustion must be decided by a jury when intertwined with a claim carrying a Seventh Amendment jury trial right.

How we know · 5 sourced claims
  • The PLRA requires prisoners to exhaust available grievance procedures before filing suit in federal court under 42 U.S.C. Section 1997e(a).

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • Parties are entitled to a jury trial on PLRA exhaustion when that issue is intertwined with the merits of a claim that requires a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The PLRA is silent on whether judges or juries should resolve exhaustion disputes, which is strong evidence that the usual practice of sending factual disputes to the jury should be followed.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • The Court construed the PLRA to require a jury trial in Richards's case and did not address whether Congress could have required otherwise without violating the Seventh Amendment.

    Source: syllabus, Held

  • Roberts delivered the opinion of the Court, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Jackson, and Barrett filed a dissenting opinion joined by Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh.

    Source: syllabus, lineup

Read the opinion on supremecourt.gov