October Term 2015 · Docket 15-6418
Does the Johnson ruling apply to past convictions?
the sides that brought the case seek retroactive relief. The government opposes this application.
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. Ali argued Johnson is a substantive rule.
Mr. Dreeben agreed Johnson is substantive and retroactive.
questions_and_answers
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 26-50 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 26-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 52-26 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 52-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 32-34 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 32-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 52-1 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 52-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 30-36 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 30-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 6-18 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 6-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 6-14 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 6-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-20 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-48
- 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 4-12 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 4-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-46 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 52-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 52-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 14-22 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 14-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 24-30 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 24-30
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether a new legal rule applies to old convictions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 26-50 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 26-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-20 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-48
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 30, 2016.
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 sides that brought the case want the new rule to apply to their past convictions.
The government wants the new rule to apply only to future cases.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 26-50 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 26-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-20 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-48
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the rule defines substantive criminal law.
The government argues the rule eliminates a sentencing basis.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 26-50 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 26-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-20 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-48
What the justices asked
Justice Kennedy asked if the sentence stayed within statutory limits.
Justice Ginsburg asked if the elements clause was decided below.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 52-26 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 52-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 32-34 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 32-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 52-1 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 52-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 30-36 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 30-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 6-18 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 6-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 6-14 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 6-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 4-12 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 4-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-46 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 52-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 52-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 14-22 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 14-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 24-30 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 24-30
Why it matters
This dispute determines who receives retroactive relief. It affects the finality of criminal convictions. It shapes the scope of federal sentencing laws.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 26-50 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 26-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-20 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-48
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 11, lines 52-26 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 52-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 32-34 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 32-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 52-1 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 52-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 30-36 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 30-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 6-18 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 6-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 6-14 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 6-14
- 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 4-12 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 4-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-46 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-46
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 52-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 52-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 14-22 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 14-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 24-30 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 24-30
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 11, lines 26-50 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 26-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-20 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-48
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 26-50 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 26-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 52-20 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 52-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 20-48 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 20-48
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.