October Term 2014 · Docket 13-9026

Does forcing a victim to walk a few feet trigger a bank robbery enhancement?

the side that brought the case argues the statute requires significant movement. The government says any forced movement counts.

Official caption
Whitfield 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.
  2. — 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

    the side that brought the case's counsel stated the provision targets extreme conduct.

    Government counsel argued the statute prescribes greater punishment for forced accompaniment.

    justice_sotomayor_asked_where_de_minimis_applies

    justice_scalia_noted_congressional_intent_matters

    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

The case tests the meaning of forced accompaniment in federal bank robbery law.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 2, 2014.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case wants the enhancement removed for minor movement.

The government wants the enhancement applied to any movement.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case argues the statute targets extreme conduct like murder.

The government argues the text covers any forced accompaniment.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked how much distance qualifies as accompaniment.

Justice Scalia questioned whether a spatial component exists in the law.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

The ruling defines the threshold for enhanced bank robbery penalties.

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