October Term 2014 · Docket 13-7451
Does a fish count as a tangible object under federal law?
Prosecutors argue a dead fish is a tangible object. The defendant argues the law only covers information storage devices.
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
Mr. Martinez argued the phrase unambiguously covers physical evidence.
Mr. Badalamenti argued the phrase confines to information storage devices.
questions_asked_by_justices
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 41-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 41-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-1
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests the scope of a federal statute. The government claims the law covers all physical items. The defendant claims the law covers only information storage devices.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-11
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 5, 2014.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
The government wants the conviction to stand.
The defendant wants the conviction overturned.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-11
What each side says
The government argues the statute covers all physical evidence.
The defendant argues the statute covers only information storage devices.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-11
What the justices asked
Justice Alito asked if a blank iPad falls under the law.
Justice Ginsburg asked why the phrase stands alone in the text.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 41-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 41-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-1
Why it matters
The outcome defines the scope of federal obstruction laws. It determines what physical items prosecutors can charge. It affects how courts interpret statutory language.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-11
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 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 13-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 41-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 41-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 45-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 45-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-3 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 17-43 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 17-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 47-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 47-1
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 24, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 45-9 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 45-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-11
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.