For decades, insurers seeking to object in their insured's Chapter 11 reorganizations were blocked by the "insurance neutrality" doctrine, a prudential limitation that stopped courts from considering objections on the merits unless the insurer could show a confirmed plan "impair[ed] the insurer's pre-petition policy rights" or "'alter[ed] the quantum of liability'" it faced. But in Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected this judge-made limitation as "conceptually wrong and mak[ing] little practical sense." That ruling also indicates tension between the court's statutory approach and that of lower courts which apply other doctrines to end bankruptcy appeals on prudential grounds with no consideration of the merits.