2001 Supreme Court term

DAVID R. McKUNE, WARDEN, ET AL. v. ROBERT G. LILE

Dockets 00-1187Argued
AI-generated independent summary

This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.

In brief

Overview

According to United States (amicus curiae), according to United States (amicus curiae), the case also addresses state confidentiality rules for inmate treatment programs and the incentives offered to inmates who participate.

Background and question before the Court

Justice Souter asked whether participation required the prisoner to describe previous offenses.

Justice Scalia asked Mr. Garre why the Federal Government does not think it a good idea to grant immunity.

According to Justice, a Justice questioned whether the Sentencing Guidelines would be invalid if they gave bad points for refusing to accept responsibility instead of good points for acceptance.

According to Chief Justice Rehnquist, chief Justice Rehnquist noted that the case was submitted at 12:01 p.m.

What each side argues

Petitioner – David R. McKune, Warden

According to Petitioners (McAllister), according to Petitioners (McAllister), the Fifth Amendment compulsion inquiry is contextual; in prison the context differs from outside situations such as losing a job or a law license.

Respondent – Robert G. Lile

According to State of Kansas, the State has set up a structure where good behavior leads to higher levels, and this system applies to all inmates.

According to State, only a few states, such as California and Kentucky, have confidentiality provisions; Kansas uniquely requires extensive additional information.

According to State (Wiltanger), according to State (Wiltanger), the Fifth Amendment is a bedrock principle, and a confession is the most powerful piece of evidence.

What happened at oral argument

Source-limited The available primary sources do not support a complete explanation yet.

What the Court decided

Pending This section will be added when the relevant Court material is available.

Why it matters

Source-limited The available primary sources do not support a complete explanation yet.

Terms to know

No glossary terms are available for this guide.

Primary sources

Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.

  • a4d322680d0fa86aad75-r1-5831754543ace96e.pdforal argument transcript

Guide generated September 19, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.