October Term 2015 · Docket 14-8358
Does a prior state conviction for abusing a minor trigger a federal mandatory minimum sentence?
The dispute centers on whether a specific federal statute requires a ten-year minimum sentence for defendants with prior state convictions involving minors.
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
the side that brought the case contends the statute reserves severe punishment for specific federal offenses.
The government argues the statute picks up definitions from federal provisions to cover state crimes.
Justice Kennedy noted Congress used similar statutory styles in later laws, favoring the government's view.
Justice Kagan asked if Congress intended to capture every conceivable state statute involving minors.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 10-34 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 10-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 24-28 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 24-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 8-14 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 8-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 18-1 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 18-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 20-32 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 20-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 8-12 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 8-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-24 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 40-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 40-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-24 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 32-4 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 32-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 22-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 22-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 8-10 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 8-10
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of a federal sentencing statute. The core issue is whether the law covers prior state offenses involving minors or only specific federal crimes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-24 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-42
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 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the mandatory minimum sentence removed from their case.
The government wants the mandatory minimum sentence to remain in effect.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-24 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-42
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues the statute only covers specific federal offenses, not all state crimes involving minors.
The government argues the statute broadly covers any state offense relating to sexual abuse of a minor.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-24 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-42
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if the mandatory minimum applies to a federal conviction for abusing an adult.
Justice Alito questioned the grammatical structure of the statutory list and its redundancy.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 10-34 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 10-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 24-28 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 24-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 8-14 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 8-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 18-1 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 18-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 20-32 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 20-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 8-12 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 8-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 40-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 40-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-24 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 32-4 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 32-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 22-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 22-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 8-10 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 8-10
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of federal sentencing laws. It determines which prior state convictions trigger severe federal penalties. The outcome affects how judges apply mandatory minimums to similar cases.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-24 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-42
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 10, lines 10-34 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 10-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 24-28 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 24-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 8-14 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 8-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 18-1 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 18-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 20-32 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 20-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 8-12 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 8-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 44-4 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 44-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-18 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 40-50 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 40-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 14-24 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 14-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 32-4 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 32-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 22-1 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 22-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 8-10 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 8-10
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 23, lines 52-24 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-42
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-24 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-42 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-42
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.