Your monthly support provides voters the knowledge they need to make confident decisions at the polls. Donate today.

Delligatti v. United States: Difference between revisions

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 16: Line 16:
}}
}}
'''''Delligatti v. United States''''' is a case that was decided by the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] on March 21, 2025, during the court's [[Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025|October 2024-2025 term]]. The case was {{Greener| start=11/12/2024 10:00am CST| before=scheduled for argument| after=argued}} before the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] on November 12, 2024.
'''''Delligatti v. United States''''' is a case that was decided by the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] on March 21, 2025, during the court's [[Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025|October 2024-2025 term]]. The case was {{Greener| start=11/12/2024 10:00am CST| before=scheduled for argument| after=argued}} before the [[Supreme Court of the United States]] on November 12, 2024.
In a 7-2 opinion, the court {{affirmed}} the judgment of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]]. The court held that the knowing or intentional causation of injury or death, whether by act or omission, necessarily involves using physical force against another person. Justice [[Clarence Thomas (Supreme Court)|Clarence Thomas]] delivered the opinion of the court.<ref name=Opinion/>


{{TLDRbox
{{TLDRbox
| '''[[#Background|The issue]]:''' The case {{Greener| start=6/30/2025| before=concerns| after=concerned}} [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/924 18 U.S. Code § 924 - Penalties  § 924(c)], a U.S. law establishing a mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment for carrying a firearm during a ''{{crime of violence}}''. [[#Background|Click here]] to learn more about the case's background.
| '''[[#Background|The issue]]:''' The case {{Greener| start=6/30/2025| before=concerns| after=concerned}} [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/924 18 U.S. Code § 924 - Penalties  § 924(c)], a U.S. law establishing a mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment for carrying a firearm during a ''{{crime of violence}}''. [[#Background|Click here]] to learn more about the case's background.
| '''[[#Questions presented|The questions presented]]:''' "Whether a crime that requires proof of bodily injury or death, but can be committed by failing to take action, has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force."<ref name=qp>[https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/qp/23-00825qp.pdf ''U.S. Supreme Court'', "23-825 DELLIGATTI V. UNITED STATES QP REPORT," June 3, 2024]</ref>
| '''[[#Questions presented|The questions presented]]:''' "Whether a crime that requires proof of bodily injury or death, but can be committed by failing to take action, has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force."<ref name=qp>[https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/qp/23-00825qp.pdf ''U.S. Supreme Court'', "23-825 DELLIGATTI V. UNITED STATES QP REPORT," June 3, 2024]</ref>
| '''[[#Outcome|The outcome]]:''' The appeal is pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.
| '''[[#Outcome|The outcome]]:''' In a 7-2 opinion, the court {{affirmed}} the judgment of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]].<ref name=Opinion/>
}}
}}


Line 48: Line 50:
The following timeline details key events in this case:
The following timeline details key events in this case:


*'''March 21, 2025:''' The U.S. Supreme Court {{affirmed}} the judgment of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]].<ref name=Opinion/>
*'''November 12, 2024''': The U.S. Supreme Court {{Greener| start=11/12/2024 10:00am CST| before=will hear| after=heard}} oral argument.
*'''November 12, 2024''': The U.S. Supreme Court {{Greener| start=11/12/2024 10:00am CST| before=will hear| after=heard}} oral argument.
*'''June 3, 2024:''' The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
*'''June 3, 2024:''' The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
Line 77: Line 80:


==Outcome==
==Outcome==
The case is pending adjudication before the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a 7-2 opinion, the court {{affirmed}} the judgment of the [[United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit]]. The court held that the knowing or intentional causation of injury or death, whether by act or omission, necessarily involves using physical force against another person. Justice [[Clarence Thomas (Supreme Court)|Clarence Thomas]] delivered the opinion of the court.<ref name=Opinion>[https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-825_q713.pdf ''U.S. Supreme Court'', "Delligatti v. United States," March 21, 2025]</ref>
 
===Opinion===
In the court's majority opinion, Justice [[Clarence Thomas (Supreme Court)|Clarence Thomas]] wrote:<ref name=Opinion/>
{{quote|
The Second Circuit correctly held that causing bodily harm by omission requires the use of force. As in Castleman, the “use” of “physical force” in §924(c) encompasses the knowing or intentional causation of bodily injury. There is no exception to this principle when an offender causes bodily injury by omission rather than affirmative act. Delligatti’s §924(c) challenge therefore fails.|author=Justice [[Clarence Thomas (Supreme Court)|Clarence Thomas]]}}
 
===Dissenting opinion===
Justice [[Neil Gorsuch]] filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice [[Ketanji Brown Jackson]].
 
In his dissent, Justice Gorsuch wrote:<ref name=Opinion/>
{{quote|
In the end, the Court’s decision today comes up short on every count. It neglects §924(c)(3)(A)’s definitional terms and their ordinary meaning. It ignores important contextual clues. It leans heavily on only two, ultimately unhelpful, precedents without addressing others. And it resorts to conjecture about implicit congressional purposes that is unconvincing on its own terms. To my mind, none of the Court’s arguments can overcome the hard fact that crimes of omission do not involve the “use . . . of physical force against another.” Individuals like our lifeguard who commit offenses by omission may face punishment under many other criminal laws, but §924(c)(3)(A) does not reach them. Even if a reasonable doubt remained about that commonsense conclusion (I confess I harbor none), the rule of lenity would require us to reach the same result anyway. See Bittner v. United States, 598 U. S. 85, 101 (2023). For all these reasons, I respectfully dissent.|author=Justice [[Neil Gorsuch]]}}
 
===Text of the opinion===
Read the full opinion [https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-825_q713.pdf here].
 
<pdf width="500" height="500">File: Delligatti v. United States opinion.pdf</pdf>


==October term 2024-2025==
==October term 2024-2025==
Line 83: Line 103:


{{#section:Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025|2024-2025intro}}
{{#section:Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025|2024-2025intro}}


==See also==
==See also==
Line 113: Line 132:
[[Category:United States Supreme Court]]
[[Category:United States Supreme Court]]
[[Category:SCOTUS OT 2024]]
[[Category:SCOTUS OT 2024]]
[[Category:Pending SCOTUS cases]]
[[Category:Decided SCOTUS cases]]
[[Category: SCOTUS 7-2 opinions]]
[[Category:SCOTUS majority opinions, Clarence Thomas]]
[[Category:SCOTUS dissenting opinions, Neil Gorsuch]]

Latest revision as of 12:14, 26 March 2025


Supreme Court of the United States
Delligatti v. United States
Term: 2024
Important Dates
Argued: November 12, 2024
Decided: March 21, 2025
Outcome
affirmed
Vote
7-2
Majority
Chief Justice John Roberts • Clarence Thomas • Samuel Alito • Sonia Sotomayor • Elena Kagan • Brett Kavanaugh • Amy Coney Barrett
Dissenting
Neil Gorsuch • Ketanji Brown Jackson

Delligatti v. United States is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on March 21, 2025, during the court's October 2024-2025 term. The case was argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on November 12, 2024.

In a 7-2 opinion, the court affirmed the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The court held that the knowing or intentional causation of injury or death, whether by act or omission, necessarily involves using physical force against another person. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the court.[1]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • The issue: The case concerned 18 U.S. Code § 924 - Penalties § 924(c), a U.S. law establishing a mandatory minimum sentence of imprisonment for carrying a firearm during a crime of violence. Click here to learn more about the case's background.
  • The questions presented: "Whether a crime that requires proof of bodily injury or death, but can be committed by failing to take action, has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force."[2]
  • The outcome: In a 7-2 opinion, the court affirmed the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.[1]


    • The case came on a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. To review the lower court's opinion, click here.

    Background

    Case summary

    The following are the parties to this case:[3]

    • Petitioner: Salvatore Delligatti
      • Legal counsel: Allon Kedem (Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP)
    • Respondent: United States

    The following summary of the case was published by Oyez, a free law project from Cornell’s Legal Information Institute, Justia, and the Chicago-Kent College of Law:[5]

    “

    Salvatore Delligatti, an associate of the Genovese Crime Family, was convicted of various charges, including attempted murder in aid of racketeering (under the Violent Crimes in Aid of Racketeering (VICAR) statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5)), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence (under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i)). Delligatti had organized a plot to murder Joseph Bonelli, a neighborhood bully who had been stealing from a local gas station owner and was suspected of cooperating against bookies associated with the Genovese Crime Family. Delligatti paid another man to coordinate the murder with gang members, providing them with a gun and a car. The murder attempts were ultimately unsuccessful due to the presence of potential witnesses and the arrest of the would-be murderers by law enforcement.

    On appeal, Delligatti argued that his firearms conviction should be vacated because the predicate offenses, including the attempted murder charge, were not “crimes of violence” under the law. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the lower court’s judgment, concluding that attempted murder in aid of racketeering qualifies as a crime of violence, as it necessarily involves the attempted use of physical force, and therefore upheld Delligatti's firearms conviction.[6]

    		”

    To learn more about this case, see the following:

    Timeline

    The following timeline details key events in this case:

    Questions presented

    The petitioner presented the following questions to the court:[2]

    Questions presented:
    “ Whether a crime that requires proof of bodily injury or death, but can be committed by failing to take action, has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force.[6] ”

    Oral argument

    Audio

    Audio of oral argument:[8]




    Transcript

    Transcript of oral argument:[9]

    Outcome

    In a 7-2 opinion, the court affirmed the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The court held that the knowing or intentional causation of injury or death, whether by act or omission, necessarily involves using physical force against another person. Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the opinion of the court.[1]

    Opinion

    In the court's majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote:[1]

    “

    The Second Circuit correctly held that causing bodily harm by omission requires the use of force. As in Castleman, the “use” of “physical force” in §924(c) encompasses the knowing or intentional causation of bodily injury. There is no exception to this principle when an offender causes bodily injury by omission rather than affirmative act. Delligatti’s §924(c) challenge therefore fails.[6]

    		”
    —Justice Clarence Thomas

    Dissenting opinion

    Justice Neil Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.

    In his dissent, Justice Gorsuch wrote:[1]

    “

    In the end, the Court’s decision today comes up short on every count. It neglects §924(c)(3)(A)’s definitional terms and their ordinary meaning. It ignores important contextual clues. It leans heavily on only two, ultimately unhelpful, precedents without addressing others. And it resorts to conjecture about implicit congressional purposes that is unconvincing on its own terms. To my mind, none of the Court’s arguments can overcome the hard fact that crimes of omission do not involve the “use . . . of physical force against another.” Individuals like our lifeguard who commit offenses by omission may face punishment under many other criminal laws, but §924(c)(3)(A) does not reach them. Even if a reasonable doubt remained about that commonsense conclusion (I confess I harbor none), the rule of lenity would require us to reach the same result anyway. See Bittner v. United States, 598 U. S. 85, 101 (2023). For all these reasons, I respectfully dissent.[6]

    		”
    —Justice Neil Gorsuch

    Text of the opinion

    Read the full opinion here.

    October term 2024-2025

    See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025

    The Supreme Court began hearing cases for the term on October 7, 2024. The court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.[10]

    See also

    Cases cited


    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 U.S. Supreme Court, "Delligatti v. United States," March 21, 2025
    2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 U.S. Supreme Court, "23-825 DELLIGATTI V. UNITED STATES QP REPORT," June 3, 2024
    3. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "No. 23-825," accessed August 6, 2024
    4. ↑ Note: At the time that the Court heard this case's argument, legal counsel was provided by then-U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar. Prelogar stepped down from her position on January 20, 2025, following the swearing-in of President Donald Trump (R) to his second term. After taking office, Trump appointed Sarah M. Harris to serve as the acting U.S. Solicitor General until her successor is confirmed and sworn in.
    5. ↑ Oyez, "Delligatti v. United States," accessed August 6, 2024
    6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 6.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    7. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, United States v. Steven Pastore, Salvatore Delligatti, decided June 8, 2022
    8. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Oral Argument - Audio," argued November 12, 2024
    9. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Oral Argument - Transcript," argued November 12, 2024
    10. ↑ SupremeCourt.gov, "The Supreme Court at Work: The Term and Caseload," accessed January 24, 2022
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Delligatti_v._United_States&oldid=10302285"