October Term 2003 · Docket 02-9410
Should courts admit out-of-court statements if the witness cannot cross-examine them?
The dispute centers on whether the Confrontation Clause bars admitting testimonial statements when the witness is unavailable.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Fisher argued against retaining the reliability prong of the Roberts framework.
Mr. Dreeben stated the clause should limit testimonial statements but not bar them absolutely.
Mr. Sherman asked the Court to retain the reliability framework of Ohio v. Roberts.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 23-43 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 23-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 21-9 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 21-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-17 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 17-29 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 17-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 31-33
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 23-43 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 23-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 21-9 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 21-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-17 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 17-29 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 17-29
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 10, 2003.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 31-33
What each side wants
Washington seeks to keep the existing reliability test for admitting statements.
Crawford seeks to limit the clause to testimonial statements only.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 23-43 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 23-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 21-9 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 21-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-17 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 17-29 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 17-29
What each side says
Washington argues the reliability framework from Ohio v. Roberts remains valid.
Crawford argues the clause should not be an absolute bar to admissibility.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 23-43 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 23-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 21-9 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 21-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-17 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 17-29 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 17-29
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the Court should retain the reliability prong.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 31-33
Why it matters
This issue determines how courts handle witness statements in criminal trials.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 23-43 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 23-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 21-9 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 21-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-17 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 17-29 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 17-29
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 31-33
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 23-43 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 23-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 21-9 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 21-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-17 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 17-29 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 17-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 23-43 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 23-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-39 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 36, lines 21-9 — Transcript, file page 36, lines 21-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 23-17 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 23-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 54, lines 17-29 — Transcript, file page 54, lines 17-29
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.