Viking River Cruises v. Moriana
142 S. Ct. 1906 · No. 20-1573 · 2021 term · Roberts Court
Decided Jun 15, 2022 · argued Mar 30, 2022
Unions · Arbitration
Majority opinion: Samuel Alito
The voteMajorityDissent
8–18 in the majority, 1 in dissent
1 dissent (8–1)
Reversed and remanded. Viking River Cruises won.
What this ruling means
Reversed and remanded: the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the California appellate court and sent the case back to that court for further proceedings that follow the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Viking River Cruises was the petitioner, the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the case. “Won” means the Court gave that side the result it asked for.
From the Supreme Court Database. A justice who agreed with the result but not the reasoning counts in the majority.
Summary
The opening of the case’s Wikipedia article: what the case was about and what the Court held.
Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 596 U.S. 639 (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the scope of the Federal Arbitration Act.
Data notes
The text is Wikipedia’s (CC BY-SA 4.0), matched to the case by its citation, docket number or name and year, and is not checked against the opinion. The site keeps the article’s opening section, ending on its last full sentence. The one-sentence summary under the title is the Decisions list’s: Wikipedia’s own ruling sentence, or, tagged “AI-written”, one Claude wrote from this opening.
How the justices voted
Each justice who took part, placed by their Martin–Quinn ideology score for the 2021 term. Filled: the 8 in the majority. Hollow: the 1 in dissent. Colour is the party of the president who appointed them.
Majority(8)
Samuel AlitoWrote the majority opinion
Sonia SotomayorWrote a concurrence
Amy BarrettWrote a concurrence
Stephen BreyerJoined the majority
Elena KaganJoined the majority
John RobertsJoined the majority
Brett KavanaughJoined the majority
Neil GorsuchJoined the majority
Dissent(1)
Clarence ThomasWrote a dissent
Data notes
Each justice’s vote and what they wrote are from the justice-centered file of the Supreme Court Database. “Wrote a concurrence” means the justice sided with the majority and wrote separately; a justice who dissented in part is counted on the side they took overall. A justice who wrote nothing is listed as joining their side.
Positions are each justice’s Martin–Quinn score for the case’s term, the same scores as the Ideology page: negative is more liberal, positive more conservative. A score sums up a justice’s votes across the whole term, so it says where they usually sit, not why they voted as they did here. The median line is the Court’s median justice that term.
The parties
Who brought the case to the Court, who answered it, and how it got there.
- Petitioner
- Viking River CruisesEmployer
- Respondent
- MorianaEmployee, or job applicant
- Reached the Court by
- Certiorari (the Court chose to hear it)
Data notes
The names are the two sides of the case’s title. The description under each is the Supreme Court Database’s category for that party, in its own wording. The petitioner is the side that asked the Supreme Court to review the decision below. “Why it was taken” appears only when the majority opinion says lower courts disagreed or were unsure about the question; reasons that would fit any case (“to resolve the question presented”, “an important question”) are left out.
The law at issue
The law the Court was asked to apply, and the kind of power it used to decide.
- Provision
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Kind of law
- Federal Statute
- Decided by
- Statutory construction
Data notes
The Supreme Court Database codes the main constitutional provision, statute or court rule each case turned on, and the basis of the decision: judicial review of a federal or state law, interpreting a statute, supervising the lower courts, and so on. A case can rest on more than one. “Overruled” counts only where the majority opinion says so.
Timeline
What happened at the Court and how the case got there, newest first.
- Jun 15, 2022DecidedDecided · Decided 8–1: reversed and remanded. Viking River Cruises won.
- Mar 30, 2022ArguedArgued · Oral argument before the Court.
- Not datedTaken upTaken up · The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case (certiorari).
- Not datedCourt belowCourt below · Decided by the California appellate court: affirmed.
- Not datedBeganBegan · The case began in the California trial court.
Data notes
From the Supreme Court Database: the court the case began in, the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed and what that court did, how the case came to the Court, and the dates of argument and decision. The database does not date the steps in the lower courts. Court names are the database’s.
Other decisions on the same issue
36 other argued cases since 1946 on arbitration, newest first.
- Smith v. Spizzirri601 U.S. 472May 16, 2024 · 601 U.S. 472Unions9–0Unanimous band
- Bissonnette v. Lepage Bakeries Park St., LLC601 U.S. 246Apr 12, 2024 · 601 U.S. 246Unions9–0Unanimous band
- Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon142 S. Ct. 1783Jun 6, 2022 · 142 S. Ct. 1783Unions8–0Unanimous band
- Morgan v. Sundance, Inc.142 S. Ct. 1708May 23, 2022 · 142 S. Ct. 1708Unions9–0Unanimous band
- Badgerow v. Walters142 S. Ct. 1310Mar 31, 2022 · 142 S. Ct. 1310Unions8–18–1 band
- Lamps Plus Inc. v. Varela139 S. Ct. 1407Apr 24, 2019 · 139 S. Ct. 1407Unions5–45–4 band
- New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira139 S. Ct. 532Jan 15, 2019 · 139 S. Ct. 532Unions8–0Unanimous band
- Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis138 S. Ct. 1612May 21, 2018 · 138 S. Ct. 1612Unions5–45–4 band
- Granite Rock Company v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters et al.561 U.S. 287Jun 24, 2010 · 561 U.S. 287Unions7–27–2 band
- Rent-A-Center, West, Inc. v. Antonio Jackson561 U.S. 63Jun 21, 2010 · 561 U.S. 63Unions5–45–4 band
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Waffle House, Inc.534 U.S. 279Jan 15, 2002 · 534 U.S. 279Unions6–36–3 band
- Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Saint Clair Adams532 U.S. 105Mar 21, 2001 · 532 U.S. 105Unions5–45–4 band
- Ceasar Wright v. Universal Maritime Service Corporation et al.525 U.S. 70Nov 16, 1998 · 525 U.S. 70Unions9–0Unanimous band
- Air Line Pilots Association v. Robert A. Miller, et al.523 U.S. 866May 26, 1998 · 523 U.S. 866Unions7–27–2 band
- Litton Financial Printing Division, a Division of Litton Business Systems, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, et al.501 U.S. 190Jun 13, 1991 · 501 U.S. 190Unions5–45–4 band
- Robert D. Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corporation500 U.S. 20May 13, 1991 · 500 U.S. 20Unions7–27–2 band
- United Paperworkers International Union, AFL-CIO, et al. v. Misco, Inc.484 U.S. 29Dec 1, 1987 · 484 U.S. 29Unions8–0Unanimous band
- AT&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers of America et al.475 U.S. 643Apr 7, 1986 · 475 U.S. 643Unions9–0Unanimous band
- Schneider Moving & Storage Co. v. Robbins et al.466 U.S. 364Apr 18, 1984 · 466 U.S. 364Unions9–0Unanimous band
- Clayton v. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, et al.451 U.S. 679May 26, 1981 · 451 U.S. 679Unions5–45–4 band
- United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Mitchell et al.451 U.S. 56Apr 20, 1981 · 451 U.S. 56Unions9–0Unanimous band
- Barrentine et al. v. Arkansas-Best Freight System, Inc., et al.450 U.S. 728Apr 6, 1981 · 450 U.S. 728Unions7–27–2 band
- Nolde Brothers, Inc. v. Local No. 358, Bakery & Confectionery Workers Union, AFL-CIO430 U.S. 243Mar 7, 1977 · 430 U.S. 243Unions7–27–2 band
- Buffalo Forge Co. v. United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, et al.428 U.S. 397Jul 6, 1976 · 428 U.S. 397Unions5–45–4 band
- Hines et al. v. Anchor Motor Freight, Inc., et al.424 U.S. 554Mar 3, 1976 · 424 U.S. 554Unions6–27–2 band
- International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150, AFL-CIO v. Flair Builders, Inc.406 U.S. 487May 30, 1972 · 406 U.S. 487Unions7–27–2 band
- Boys Markets, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, Local 770398 U.S. 235Jun 1, 1970 · 398 U.S. 235Unions5–27–2 band
- Republic Steel Corp. v. Maddox379 U.S. 650Jan 25, 1965 · 379 U.S. 650Unions8–18–1 band
- Independent Petroleum Workers of America, Inc. v. American Oil Co.379 U.S. 130Nov 23, 1964 · 379 U.S. 130Unions4–45–4 band
- John Wiley & Sons, Inc., v. Livingston, President of District 65, Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, AFL-CIO376 U.S. 543Mar 30, 1964 · 376 U.S. 543Unions8–0Unanimous band
- Local Union No. 721, United Packinghouse, Food & Allied Workers, AFL-CIO, v. Needham Packing Co., Doing Business As Sioux City Dressed Beef376 U.S. 247Mar 9, 1964 · 376 U.S. 247Unions9–0Unanimous band
- Carey, President of the International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers, AFL-CIO, v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.375 U.S. 261Jan 6, 1964 · 375 U.S. 261Unions6–27–2 band
- Drake Bakeries Incorporated v. Local 50, American Bakery & Confectionery Workers International, AFL-CIO, et al.370 U.S. 254Jun 18, 1962 · 370 U.S. 254Unions7–18–1 band
- United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel & Car Corp.363 U.S. 593Jun 20, 1960 · 363 U.S. 593Unions7–18–1 band
- United Steelworkers of America v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.363 U.S. 574Jun 20, 1960 · 363 U.S. 574Unions7–18–1 band
- United Steelworkers of America v. American Manufacturing Co.363 U.S. 564Jun 20, 1960 · 363 U.S. 564Unions8–0Unanimous band
Data notes
Every other orally argued case with a clear vote, from the 1946 term on, that the Supreme Court Database files under the same issue as this one. The database gives each case one issue from a list of about 270 (abortion, search and seizure of vehicles, the death penalty, and so on), whatever law it turned on.
Official record
Read the argument audio on Oyez and Wikipedia. Case data from the Supreme Court Database, Version 2026 Release 01, through the 2025 term.