October Term 2014 · Docket 13-1487

Can courts order the transfer of a felon's seized guns to a third party?

The dispute centers on whether federal courts can order the government to transfer a felon's seized firearms to a third party.

Official caption
Henderson v. United States
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — 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.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Ortiz argued the case asks whether the felon-in-possession statute prevents courts from ordering the transfer of seized firearms to a third party.

    Justice Kennedy asked if a black-letter case supports the proposition that courts have general equitable authority to order such transfers.

    Justice Kennedy asked under what statutory rule or authority the court holds the hearing on the transfer.

    Justice Sotomayor asked if the side that brought the case was on a futile mission in this circuit regarding the transfer request.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the scope of federal court authority over seized property. the side that brought the case seeks a court order to transfer his guns to a third party. The government argues the statute bars such orders. The core legal question is whether the felon-in-possession statute prevents courts from directing the transfer of seized firearms.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 24, 2015.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case wants the Court to allow the transfer of his seized guns to a third party.

The government wants the Court to uphold the ban on transferring the guns to a third party.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case argues the felon-in-possession statute does not prevent courts from ordering the transfer of seized firearms to a suitable third party.

The government argues the statute prohibits courts from ordering the transfer of a felon's seized firearms to a third party.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Ginsburg asked how the Court can verify that a transfer to a third party prevents the felon from possessing the guns.

Justice Ginsburg asked where the side that brought the case requested the court to allow the guns to be sold by a licensed dealer.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the limits of federal court power over seized property. It determines whether courts can direct the transfer of a felon's guns to third parties. The outcome shapes how courts handle seized firearms in criminal cases. It affects the balance between property rights and public safety.

Official sources for this section

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 Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON