← All Cases Coverage by Bryan K. Randolph · BrynoDC

Henry Schein Inc. v. Archer and White Sales Inc.

No. 19-963 SCOTUS · Decided Decided SCOTUS
Argued: Dec 8, 2020 Decided: Jan 15, 2021


The Facts

Archer and White Sales sued Henry Schein Inc. and others for antitrust violations. The arbitration agreement between the parties delegated questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator. Schein moved to compel arbitration. The Fifth Circuit refused, applying its own wholly-groundless exception that allowed courts to bypass delegation clauses when the argument for arbitrability was obviously frivolous. The Supreme Court reversed, finding no textual support for the exception in the Federal Arbitration Act.

The Application

History

The Fifth Circuit's wholly-groundless exception allowed courts to bypass the parties' delegation clause by deeming the antitrust arbitrability argument too frivolous to warrant arbitrator review. The Supreme Court rejected this approach, finding no textual basis in the FAA for carving out exceptions to delegation clauses, regardless of how weak the underlying arbitrability argument appeared. By enforcing the clause as written, the Court held that Schein's motion to compel arbitration must proceed to the arbitrator, who would decide whether the antitrust claims were arbitrable - the very threshold question the parties had delegated. This eliminates judicial gatekeeping power over delegation clauses and ensures that arbitrators control threshold questions of arbitrability when the parties have so agreed.

The Conclusion

**The ruling eliminates judicial power to second-guess arbitrability arguments by invoking a wholly-groundless exception.** Parties who include delegation clauses in arbitration agreements can be confident that courts will refer threshold arbitrability questions to the arbitrator as agreed. The decision strengthens the enforceability of arbitration delegation provisions.

CourtSupreme Court of the United States
Filed -
CL StatusActive
View on CourtListener →

No circuit court data for this case.

Cert Granted -
StatusActive
Filed (CL) -
View on CourtListener →
SCOTUS TMR-4302b2bd May 14, 2026

Case Analysis

Overview

The Supreme Court held 9-0 that courts have no power to override arbitration agreements' delegation clauses on the ground that the underlying arbitration claim is wholly groundless. Justice Thomas wrote for the Court, requiring courts to enforce delegation clauses as written and send threshold arbitrability questions to the arbitrator.

Facts

Archer and White Sales sued Henry Schein Inc. and others for antitrust violations. The arbitration agreement between the parties delegated questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator. Schein moved to compel arbitration. The Fifth Circuit refused, applying its own wholly-groundless exception that allowed courts to bypass delegation clauses when the argument for arbitrability was obviously frivolous. The Supreme Court reversed, finding no textual support for the exception in the Federal Arbitration Act.

Issue

Whether a court may refuse to enforce a delegation clause in an arbitration agreement on the ground that the argument for arbitrability is wholly groundless, even when the parties' agreement delegates that question to the arbitrator.

Rule

The Federal Arbitration Act requires courts to enforce arbitration agreements according to their terms. When parties agree to delegate threshold arbitrability questions to an arbitrator, courts must refer those questions to the arbitrator, not resolve them independently.

Analysis

The Fifth Circuit's wholly-groundless exception allowed courts to bypass the parties' delegation clause by deeming the antitrust arbitrability argument too frivolous to warrant arbitrator review. The Supreme Court rejected this approach, finding no textual basis in the FAA for carving out exceptions to delegation clauses, regardless of how weak the underlying arbitrability argument appeared. By enforcing the clause as written, the Court held that Schein's motion to compel arbitration must proceed to the arbitrator, who would decide whether the antitrust claims were arbitrable. The very threshold question the parties had delegated. This eliminates judicial gatekeeping power over delegation clauses and ensures that arbitrators control threshold questions of arbitrability when the parties have so agreed.

Conclusion

**The ruling eliminates judicial power to second-guess arbitrability arguments by invoking a wholly-groundless exception.** Parties who include delegation clauses in arbitration agreements can be confident that courts will refer threshold arbitrability questions to the arbitrator as agreed. The decision strengthens the enforceability of arbitration delegation provisions.

Notes

OT2020. Added via SCOTUS bulk import 2026-05-14

Subscribe on Substack ↗

This tracker is maintained by BrynoDC and is free because readers fund it. Support