October Term 2019 · Docket 18-1109

Does a new sentencing law require a fresh trial for a death row inmate?

James McKinney argues his death sentence violates current law. Arizona claims the error does not require a new trial.

Official caption
McKinney v. Arizona
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

    Katyal argued McKinney never had a compliant sentencing.

    Skinner argued one path resolves the case regardless of outcome.

    Kavanaugh questioned why adding an invalid factor differs from excluding a valid one.

    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

James McKinney faces execution in Arizona. He claims his sentencing violated current law. The state argues the error does not require a new trial. The Court must decide if a new proceeding is mandatory.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on December 11, 2019.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

McKinney wants a new sentencing proceeding under current law.

Arizona wants to keep the existing death sentence intact.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

McKinney argues the state must apply new sentencing rules.

Arizona argues the error does not invalidate the sentence.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked if the case needs a remand.

Justice Kavanaugh questioned the difference between adding and removing factors.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines how courts handle sentencing errors. It determines if inmates get new trials under new laws. It affects the fairness of death penalty proceedings nationwide.

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