United States: Supreme Court Strikes Down Criminal Firearms Statute As Unconstitutionally Vague

An important statute in the prosecution of federal firearms offenses was struck down this week by the Supreme Court in United States v. Davis.  The ruling will relieve many defendants who would otherwise face longer sentences for using firearms while committing a "crime of violence" – a phrase the Supreme Court determined was unconstitutionally vague as defined under the statute.

Section 924(c) of the federal criminal code makes it a separate federal offense to use or carry a firearm during a federal "crime of violence".  The law, originally enacted by the Gun Control Act of 1968 and amended in the 1980s, was designed to combat the rise of violent gun crime in America.  Over time, it has become one of the most often-prosecuted offenses in the federal criminal system.  It is also one of the most severe sentencing enhancement statutes.  Section 924(c) offenders, for instance, face a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison, over and above any sentence they receive for the underlying crime.  The minimum sentence rises to seven years if the defendant brandishes the firearm and ten years if the firearm is discharged.  Certain types of weapons also trigger enhanced penalties and repeat violations of Section 924(c) carry a minimum sentence of 25 years.

The ultimate issue in Davis, however, was how the statute defines a "crime of violence".  Section 924(c)(3) defines a "crime of violence" in two ways: the first clause known as the elements clause, and the second the residual clause.  The elements clause asks whether the underlying crime categorically fits within Section 924(c) where a judge finds that an element of the underlying crime entails the use of physical force.  The residual clause, on the other hand, focuses on the defendant's conduct during the crime and asks the jury whether the defendant's actual conduct involved a substantial risk that physical force may be used.  The question in Davis was whether the residual clause is unconstitutionally vague.  Justice Neil Gorsuch, breaking rank with the conservative wing and writing for the Court, believed it is.

While the decision in Davis is extraordinary, many observers consider it the latest "domino to fall" in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2015 ruling in United States v. JohnsonJohnson involved a vagueness challenge to the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act, which imposed additional punishment for repeat offenders with multiple prior convictions for "violent felonies".  The ACCA's residual clause similarly defined a violent felony as an "offense that otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another."  Justice Scalia, writing for an eight-member majority, concluded that the ACCA's residual clause was unconstitutionally vague because it "leaves grave uncertainty about how to estimate the risk posed by a crime ...[and] how much risk it takes for a crime to qualify as a violent felony."

Justice Scalia's opinion in Johnson set the stage for a broader constitutional challenge to the federal criminal code's definition of "crime of violence" in the residual clause of Section 16, which is almost identical to Section 924(c)'s residual clause.  In Sessions v. Dimaya, the Supreme Court considered how the Immigration and Nationality Act defines an "aggravated felony", which is a ground for removal in immigration proceedings.  The INA's definition of aggravated felony cross-references several other federal criminal statutes, including any crime of violence as defined in Section 16(b) of the federal criminal code.  Justice Kagan, writing for a smaller majority, explained that "Johnson was a straightforward decision, with equally straightforward application here."  Applying the holding in Johnson, she argued that federal criminal code's residual clause had the same two fatal features that rendered the ACCA's residual clause unconstitutionally vague: it "'requires a court to picture the kind of conduct that the crime involves in 'the ordinary case,' and to judge whether that abstraction presents' some not-well-specified-yet-sufficiently-large degree of risk."

In many ways, Dimaya foreshadowed the result in Davis this week.  Justice Gorsuch's concurrence in Dimaya last year was effectively a prologue to his opinion in Davis.  His concurrence in Dimaya began with a lengthy defense of the vagueness doctrine, followed by a discussion of the fair notice standard.  Applying both in Dimaya – and relying on both again in Davis –  Justice Gorsuch agreed that Section 16's residual clause failed to pass constitutional muster for the same reasons Justice Scalia identified in Johnson.

On other side of the divide, Chief Justice Robert's dissent predicted the result in Davis when he wrote that the majority in Dimaya "uses a constitutional doctrine with dubious origins to invalidate yet another statute (while calling into question countless more)."  Justice Kavanaugh echoed this sentiment in his dissent in Davis, considering the majority's opinion a "serious mistake ... to follow Johnson and Dimaya off the constitutional cliff...."

In the end, the decision in Davis will undoubtedly affect the prosecution of federal firearms offenses going forward.  More importantly, however, it will open the floodgates to thousands of petitions filed by federal offenders previously convicted under Section 924(c).  Indeed, the concern that overturning this statute would result in releasing thousands of inmates convicted of violent gun crimes early was an issue raised by the government in its briefing and at oral arguments, and by Justice Kavanaugh in his dissent.  Nevertheless, this concern is largely overstated, as Justice Gorsuch pointed out, because overturning a defendant's 924(c) conviction will not necessarily result in lighter sentences.  As he explained, courts of appeals routinely vacate a defendant's entire sentence on all counts so that, at resentencing, a district court may increase the sentence for the remaining counts if such an increase is warranted.

The decision in Davis also reveals Justice Gorsuch's libertarian leanings and his general skepticism of state power.  Indeed, we have seen Justice Gorsuch advocate for defendants' rights more than once in recent decisions, notably in Gamble v. United States.  In Gamble, Justice Gorsuch, along with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, dissented and argued against the double jeopardy exception that allows federal and state prosecutors to pursue alleged criminals for the same offense.  While his argument did not carry the day in Gamble, it did in Davis and its impact will be unmistakably noticed in the months to come.

Disclaimer: This Alert has been prepared and published for informational purposes only and is not offered, nor should be construed, as legal advice. For more information, please see the firm's full disclaimer.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Bracewell & Giuliani LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Bracewell & Giuliani LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions