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
The case was heard in oral argument before the Supreme Court at 1:00 p.m.
The petitioner argues that judicial discretion must be guided by sound legal principles and be subject to meaningful appellate review.
The government contends that a sentence reduction that falls within the guidelines is unreviewable.
Justice Ginsburg asked what standard of review the Court of Appeals uses for sentences.
Justice Kennedy asked whether the workload on federal courts should be a factor in the decision.
Justice Alito asked why appellate review might be precluded.
- [1] 75231018eb7d1543d6b9-r1-8c5dc719aaf31f67.pdf, p. 2
- [2] 75231018eb7d1543d6b9-r1-8c5dc719aaf31f67.pdf, p. 4
- [3] 75231018eb7d1543d6b9-r1-8c5dc719aaf31f67.pdf, p. 7
- [4] 75231018eb7d1543d6b9-r1-8c5dc719aaf31f67.pdf, p. 5
- [5] 75231018eb7d1543d6b9-r1-8c5dc719aaf31f67.pdf, p. 9
- [6] 75231018eb7d1543d6b9-r1-8c5dc719aaf31f67.pdf, p. 19
Background and question before the Court
According to Government, the case involves a sentence reduction that falls within sentencing guidelines.
According to Petitioner, the petitioner emphasizes that judicial discretion should not be arbitrary and must be reviewable.
According to Justice Ginsburg, the Court considered the appropriate standard of review for appellate courts reviewing sentence reductions.
According to Justice Kennedy, the Court considered whether the federal courts’ workload should influence the decision.
According to Justice Alito, the Court considered why appellate review might be limited in this context.
What each side argues
Petitioner
According to Petitioner, judicial discretion must be guided by sound legal principles and be subject to meaningful appellate review.
United States
According to Government, a sentence reduction that falls within the guidelines is unreviewable.
What happened at oral argument
Oral argument took place before the Supreme Court at 1:00 p.m.
According to Chief Justice Roberts, chief Justice Roberts noted that the case was submitted.
What the Court decided
Why it matters
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.
- 75231018eb7d1543d6b9-r1-8c5dc719aaf31f67.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 26, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.