Keathley v. Buddy Ayers — Bankruptcy Omission: Intent Required? Estoppel | FULL Oral Argument (2026)

Full oral argument in Keathley v. Buddy Ayers Construction, Inc., No. 25-6, argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on March 24, 2026. Complete and unedited, with the official transcript as captions. The question: Thomas Keathley did not disclose a civil claim in his bankruptcy filings. Judicial estoppel can prevent a party from taking inconsistent positions in different proceedings, but the courts of appeals disagree about whether this omission must have been intended to mislead the bankruptcy court. May a court bar the civil claim based on a potential motive for nondisclosure without evidence that the plaintiff actually acted in bad faith? Arguing: • Gregory G. Garre, Counsel — for the Petitioner • Frederick Liu, Assistant to the Solicitor General — for the United States, amicus curiae supporting vacatur • William M. Jay, Counsel — for the Respondent Decided June 11, 2026 · 9–0. Vacated and remanded. Jackson, J., for a unanimous Court. Concurring: Thomas, J., joined by Gorsuch, J.; Sotomayor, J. 608 U. S. 647 (2026) — the Court's preliminary print; the page is subject to revision before the bound volume. CHAPTERS 0:00 Case called — Chief Justice Roberts · Opening — Gregory G. Garre · P. 4 2:15 Thomas: what evidence counts? · P. 6 8:02 Barrett: limited to bankruptcy? · P. 12 17:30 Alito: knowledge of inconsistency? · P. 21 24:17 Kagan: must intent be proved? · P. 28 31:33 Jackson: independent proceedings · P. 37 32:02 Opening — Frederick Liu, for United States, amicus · P. 38 38:23 Kagan: integrity of the courts · P. 44 46:25 Opening — William M. Jay, for Respondent · P. 53 53:00 Jackson: what advantage was gained? · P. 60 1:00:00 Gorsuch: a potential windfall · P. 67 1:06:43 Jackson: totality of circumstances · P. 74 1:08:06 Rebuttal — Gregory G. Garre · P. 77 1:09:27 The case is submitted · P. 78 SOURCES • Transcript: supremecourt.gov, No. 25-6 (Official — Subject to Final Review) • Audio: supremecourt.gov, the Court's own recording of the argument • Opinion: 608 U. S. 647 (2026) — supremecourt.gov, the Court's preliminary print — https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions... Nothing here is edited, summarised or reconstructed. The Court bans cameras, so no video of this argument exists; this is the complete audio record as released. Every caption is the official transcript verbatim, with the transcript page shown on screen so any quote can be checked against the record. The Court revises what it publishes — argument transcripts carry “Official — Subject to Final Review” and slip opinions are reissued — and a decision arrives long after the argument. This description is updated as the record changes: the decision is added when it is handed down, and the citation gains its page number when the volume assigns one. The spoken text is never edited. #SCOTUS #SupremeCourt #JudicialEstoppel #SCOTUSNotice