Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring opinion in a bankruptcy case calling on the Supreme Court to reexamine judicial estoppel, a legal doctrine that courts use to prevent parties from contradicting positions they took earlier. This matters because Thomas and Gorsuch signaling openness to dismantling established doctrines could reshape how courts handle procedural consistency — potentially creating broader avenues for litigants to change their legal positions. The Supreme Court unanimously decided the underlying case but narrowed the test for applying judicial estoppel, suggesting the doctrine may already be shifting.