October Term 2008 · Docket 07-608
Does a domestic violence conviction require a specific statutory element?
The dispute centers on whether a prior conviction qualifies as a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence under federal law.
Verified source milestones
- — 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
Ms. Saharsky argued the statutory text supports the government's position.
She stated a contrary reading would defeat Congress's purposes.
Mr. Giatras argued the government described a statute Congress did not pass.
He stated the final law requires a domestic relationship element.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 31-41 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 31-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 11-37 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 11-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-5
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the definition of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. The government argues the statute covers broad domestic offenses. the opposing side argues the law requires a specific domestic relationship element.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 11-37 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 11-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 10, 2008.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
The government wants the conviction to count as a domestic violence crime.
the opposing side wants the conviction to fail the statutory definition.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 11-37 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 11-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
What each side says
The government argues the statutory text naturally supports their reading.
the opposing side argues Congress required a specific domestic relationship element.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 11-37 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 11-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked why the compromise did not include later language.
Justice Scalia noted some lawmakers wanted the statute to be a dead letter.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 31-41 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 31-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-5
Why it matters
This definition determines federal sentencing enhancements for firearm possession. It clarifies the scope of domestic violence statutes. It affects how courts classify prior convictions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 11-37 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 11-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
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 10, lines 31-41 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 31-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 17-31 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 17-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 41-47 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 41-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-43 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-35 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 27-7 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 27-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-5 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-5
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 26, lines 11-37 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 11-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 11-37 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 11-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
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.