The question
Whether the 30-day deadline to remove a case to federal court under 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(1) is subject to equitable tolling.
Enbridge Energy, LP v. Nessel
What the Court decided
The Court held that Enbridge's removal was untimely and that the 30-day removal deadline in 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(1) is not subject to equitable tolling. The text, structure, and context of the statute show that Congress did not want the deadline to be equitably tolled. The statute speaks in mandatory terms and already lists specific exceptions that reflect equitable considerations, which indicates Congress did not intend courts to read additional equitable exceptions into it.
How the justices split
UnanimousThe Court's opinion
Sotomayor, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito, Kagan, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Jackson
The opinion held that the 30-day removal deadline in Section 1446(b)(1) is not subject to equitable tolling. The fact that the deadline is nonjurisdictional does not automatically make it subject to tolling, because some nonjurisdictional rules remain mandatory. The Court did not decide whether the provision is a statute of limitations carrying a presumption of equitable tolling, because even if that presumption applied it is rebutted here. The statute's mandatory text requires that a notice of removal be filed within 30 days, and its structure lists specific exceptions in detail, including a discovery-rule-like extension in Section 1446(b)(3), which shows Congress already allowed for equitable considerations in some respects but not others. Congress therefore did not want courts to read additional equitable exceptions into the statute, and Enbridge's removal 887 days after service was untimely.
How we know · 5 sourced claims
The Court held that 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(1)'s text, structure, and context are inconsistent with equitable tolling.
Source: syllabus, Held
The Court held Enbridge's removal was untimely.
Source: syllabus, Held
The fact that the 30-day removal deadline is nonjurisdictional does not automatically render it subject to equitable tolling.
Source: syllabus, Held
Section 1446(b)(3) provides an extension when a case at first appears unremovable but is later ascertained to be removable, functioning like an equitable discovery rule.
Source: syllabus, Held
Sotomayor delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
Source: syllabus, lineup