October Term 2015 · Docket 14-10154
Does reckless touching count as using physical force for gun bans?
The dispute centers on whether a reckless misdemeanor touching qualifies as using physical force under federal gun laws.
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. Villa argued that reckless misdemeanors should be excluded from the phrase use of physical force.
Ms. Villa stated that this exclusion aligns with the Court's prior definitions of use.
Ms. Villa claimed that this view matches the common law definition of battery.
Ms. Eisenstein argued that Congress intended to keep guns away from assault and battery convicts.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 26-42 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 26-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 22-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 22-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 44-12 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 26-48 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 26-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-30 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 34-38 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 34-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 4-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 4-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 10-10 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 10-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 20-28 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 20-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 34-38 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 34-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-48 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 10-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 32-36 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 32-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 4-8 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 4-8
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Federal law bans gun ownership for people convicted of assault or battery. The phrase use of physical force defines these crimes. The lower court ruled that reckless touching meets this definition. the side that brought the case argues that only intentional force counts. The government argues that any force, including reckless acts, fits the law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 26-42 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 26-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 22-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 22-42
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 29, 2016.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-20
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to exclude reckless touching from the definition of physical force.
The government wants the Court to include reckless touching in the definition of physical force.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 26-42 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 26-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 22-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 22-42
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues that common law battery requires an intentional act causing injury.
The government argues that Congress intended to ban guns for all assault and battery convictions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 26-42 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 26-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 22-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 22-42
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked if intentionality is misperceived as the act of causing injury.
Justice Ginsburg asked if bodily injury or offensive touching satisfies the act requirement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 44-12 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 26-48 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 26-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-30 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 34-38 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 34-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 4-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 4-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 10-10 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 10-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 20-28 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 20-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 34-38 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 34-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-48 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 10-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 32-36 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 32-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 4-8 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 4-8
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of federal gun bans. It determines which criminal convictions trigger lifetime firearm restrictions. It affects how states prosecute assault and battery. It clarifies the legal meaning of physical force in federal statutes. It impacts public safety and individual rights.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 26-42 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 26-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 22-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 22-42
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 44-12 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-20 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 26-48 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 26-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-30 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 34-38 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 34-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 4-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 4-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 10-10 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 10-10
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 20-28 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 20-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 34-38 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 34-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-48 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 10-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 32-36 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 32-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 4-8 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 4-8
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 25, lines 26-42 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 26-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 22-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 22-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 26-42 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 26-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 22-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 22-42
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.