2016 Supreme Court term

LORETTA E. LYNCH ATTORNEY GENERAL v. JAMES GARCIA DIMAYA

Dockets 15-1498Argued
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

Petitioner argues that the definition of a crime of violence in 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague.

According to Petitioner, the Court of Appeals held that the definition in § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague on its face, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson.

Background and question before the Court

According to Petitioner, the case concerns whether 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague.

Justice Ginsburg asked whether the government argued that if the ACCA residual clause were invalid, then § 16(b) would be vulnerable for the same reason.

What each side argues

Petitioner (Attorney General)

According to Petitioner, the definition of a crime of violence in § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague on its face.

According to Petitioner, vehicular flight from a police officer after being ordered to stop is analogous to burglary.

Respondent (Dimaya)

Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.

What happened at oral argument

Justice Ginsburg: Did the government argue that if the ACCA residual clause was invalid, then § 16(b) would be vulnerable because it faces the same central objection?

According to Justice Kagan, justice Kagan: What is the real limitation—temporal or functional?

According to Justice Sotomayor, justice Sotomayor: Why isn’t the risk of force from sawed‑off shotguns considered a substantial risk?

According to Justice Alito, justice Alito: If the Court held § 16(b) unconstitutional, what would be the impact on criminal cases using the categorical approach?

According to Justice Kennedy, justice Kennedy: If we base the decision on the civil nature of the case, does that affect other cases?

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.

  • d97a1cc3cd3b2a25b818-r1-445d04fab54520e1.pdforal argument transcript

Guide generated September 25, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.