October Term 2024 · Docket 23-7483
Can judges use retribution to revoke supervised release?
The dispute centers on whether courts may consider the seriousness of a crime when deciding to revoke supervised release.
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
the side that brought the case argued that Congress intentionally omitted retribution factors from the statute.
The government argued that the statute preserves broad discretion for sentencing courts.
Justice Alito questioned whether judges must use specific language to justify revocation.
Justice Jackson asked if the goal is to ensure conformity to release conditions.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 49-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 49-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 53-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 53-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 35-43 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 35-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 31-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 31-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 11-21
- 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 23-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 55-13 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 55-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 27-53 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 27-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 21-39 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 21-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 53-11 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 53-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 77, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 77, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 85, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 85, lines 13-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 9-41
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of judicial discretion during supervised release revocations. the side that brought the case argues that specific statutory factors limit what judges can consider. The government contends that judges retain broad discretion to weigh any relevant considerations. The core conflict involves the interpretation of Section 3583(e) versus general sentencing principles.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 85, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 85, lines 13-21
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on February 25, 2025.
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 71, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 49-37
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to limit judicial discretion to specific statutory factors.
The government wants the Court to preserve broad judicial discretion for sentencing decisions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 85, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 85, lines 13-21
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues that Congress omitted retribution factors to preclude their use in revocations.
The government argues that the statute does not displace broad discretion to consider helpful factors.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 85, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 85, lines 13-21
What the justices asked
Justice Alito asked if the test requires specific magic words from the judge.
Justice Alito asked how a judge considers offense nature without considering seriousness.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 49-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 49-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 53-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 53-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 35-43 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 35-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 31-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 31-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 11-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 55-13 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 55-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 27-53 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 27-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 21-39 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 21-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 53-11 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 53-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 77, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 77, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 9-41
Why it matters
This case defines the boundaries of judicial power in post-conviction supervision. It determines whether judges can punish based on the gravity of the original crime. The outcome shapes how courts balance public safety against individual liberty during supervised release.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 85, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 85, lines 13-21
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 49-39 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 49-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 53-11 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 53-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 53-19 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 53-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 29-31 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 29-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 35-43 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 35-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 31-41 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 31-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 15, lines 53-7 — Transcript, file page 15, lines 53-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 16, lines 11-21 — Transcript, file page 16, lines 11-21
- 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 13-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 55-13 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 55-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 11-31 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 11-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 53-9 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 53-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 49-37 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 49-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 73, lines 27-53 — Transcript, file page 73, lines 27-53
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 74, lines 21-39 — Transcript, file page 74, lines 21-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 75, lines 11-27 — Transcript, file page 75, lines 11-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 76, lines 53-11 — Transcript, file page 76, lines 53-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 77, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 77, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 19-21 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 19-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 9-41
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 4, lines 23-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 85, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 85, lines 13-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 23-11 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 23-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 48, lines 11-7 — Transcript, file page 48, lines 11-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 85, lines 13-21 — Transcript, file page 85, lines 13-21
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.