October Term 2015 · Docket 14-1096
Does a state arson conviction count as a federal aggravated felony?
The dispute centers on whether state arson laws qualify as aggravated felonies under federal immigration statutes.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — 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
the side that brought the case argues Section 1101(a)(43) includes state and foreign law violations.
The government argues Congress chose to make only federal arson an aggravated felony.
The government notes the federal arson statute carries a minimum five-year sentence.
Justice Alito questioned the statutory language describing the state offense in federal terms.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 46-12 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 10-26 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 10-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-40 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 42-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 42-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 42-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 42-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 52-8 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 52-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 10-12 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 10-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 14-16 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 14-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 42-46 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 42-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 24-50 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 24-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 26-44 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 26-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 16-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 16-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 38-42 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 38-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 8-12 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 8-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 26-26 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 26-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 30-20 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 30-20
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case asks if state arson convictions trigger federal immigration penalties. the side that brought the case argues state laws should count. The government argues only federal arson counts.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 10-26 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 10-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-40 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 10-12 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 10-12
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 3, 2015.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 42-46 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 42-46
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the state arson conviction excluded from federal aggravated felony status.
The government wants the state arson conviction included as a federal aggravated felony.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 10-26 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 10-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-40 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 10-12 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 10-12
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues Congress intended state and foreign arson laws to count as aggravated felonies.
The government argues Congress specifically chose to limit aggravated felonies to federal arson statutes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 10-26 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 10-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-40 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 10-12 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 10-12
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if the side that brought the case's reading excludes serious state arson offenses.
Justice Kagan asked why the side that brought the case's theory creates an illogical inclusion and exclusion system.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 46-12 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 42-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 42-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 42-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 42-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 52-8 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 52-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 14-16 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 14-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 42-46 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 42-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 24-50 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 24-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 26-44 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 26-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 16-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 16-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 38-42 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 38-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 8-12 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 8-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 26-26 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 26-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 30-20 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 30-20
Why it matters
This case determines which state crimes trigger federal immigration penalties. It defines the scope of federal jurisdiction over state offenses. It impacts how courts classify state convictions for immigration purposes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 10-26 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 10-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-40 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 10-12 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 10-12
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 46-12 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 46-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 42-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 42-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 28-30 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 28-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 42-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 42-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 52-8 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 52-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 14-16 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 14-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 42-46 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 42-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 24-50 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 24-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 26-44 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 26-44
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 16-18 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 16-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 38-42 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 38-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 46-6 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 46-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 8-12 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 8-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 26-26 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 26-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 30-20 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 30-20
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 10-26 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 10-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-40 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 10-12 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 10-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 10-26 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 10-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-40 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-40
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 10-12 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 10-12
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.