United States v. Davis

U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 24, 2019 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Decided
June 24, 2019
Term
October Term 2018
Vote
5–4
Majority author
Justice Gorsuch
Issue area
Due Process
Disposition
Affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part and remanded
Outcome
Petitioning party lost
Ideological direction
Liberal
Constitutional ruling
Federal law held unconstitutional

Opinion excerpt

Justice GORSUCH delivered the opinion of the Court. In our constitutional order, a vague law is no law at all. Only the people's elected representatives in Congress have the power to write new federal criminal laws. And when Congress exercises that power, it has to write statutes that give ordinary people fair warning about what the law demands of them. Vague laws transgress both of those constitutional requirements. They hand off the legislature's responsibility for defining criminal behavior to unelected prosecutors and judges, and they leave people with no sure way to know what consequences will attach to their conduct. When Congress passes a vague law, the role of courts under our Constitution is not to fashion a new, clearer law to take its place, but to treat the law as a nullity and invite Congress to try again. Today we apply these principles to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). That statute threatens long prison sentences for anyone who uses a firearm in connection with certain other federal crimes. But which other federal crimes? The statute's residual clause points to those felonies "that by [their] nature, involv[e] a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense." § 924(c)(3)(B). Even the government admits that this language, read in the way nearly everyone (including the government) has long…

Excerpt of a 119,132-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database