October Term 2023 · Docket 22-340
Does the word and require all three conditions for safety valve eligibility?
The dispute centers on whether a defendant must lack all three listed traits to qualify for a sentencing reduction.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official Court opinion 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. Dvoretzky argued that ordinary grammar treats and as a simple conjunction.
He stated that the defendant must lack all three traits to be ineligible.
Mr. Liu countered that and distributes the negative phrase across three conditions.
He argued that the context confirms the distributive meaning of the word.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 109, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 109, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 53-21 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 53-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-47 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 15-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 41-31 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 41-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-53 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 27-51 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 49-7 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 49-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 25-43 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 25-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 49-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 55-13 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 55-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-15
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests how courts interpret the word and in a federal sentencing statute. the side that brought the case argues the word joins three separate disqualifying conditions. The government argues the word creates a single combined requirement. The outcome affects how judges calculate prison sentences for eligible defendants.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 109, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 109, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-47 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 15-35
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 2, 2023.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 35-1
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to rule that lacking any one of the three traits allows eligibility.
The government wants the Court to rule that lacking all three traits is required for eligibility.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 109, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 109, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-47 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 15-35
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues that and distributes the phrase does not have across three independent conditions.
The government argues that and joins the three traits into one single, combined requirement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 109, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 109, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-47 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 15-35
What the justices asked
Justice Barrett asked how the side that brought the case reconciles their view with corpus linguistics data showing distributive usage.
Justice Kagan asked if the side that brought the case agrees the government wins if the statute used negative phrasing for all three traits.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 53-21 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 53-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 41-31 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 41-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-53 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 27-51 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 49-7 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 49-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 25-43 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 25-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 49-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 55-13 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 55-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-15
Why it matters
This interpretation determines which defendants receive reduced prison sentences. It clarifies how judges apply statutory grammar to individual cases. It sets a standard for reading similar legal lists in the future.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 109, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 109, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-47 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 15-35
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 23-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 19-29 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 19-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 49-9 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 49-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 53-21 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 53-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 41-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 41-31 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 41-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 35-37 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 35-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 27-53 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 27-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 27-51 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 27-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 13-17 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 13-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 51-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 72, lines 49-7 — Transcript, file page 72, lines 49-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 25-43 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 25-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 49-49 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 49-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 55-13 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 55-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 23-25 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 23-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 35-1 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 35-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-15 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-15
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Verified official opinions and orders
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 109, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 109, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-47 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 15-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 109, lines 35-39 — Transcript, file page 109, lines 35-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-47 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 68, lines 15-35 — Transcript, file page 68, lines 15-35
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.