101:
24:
461:
in the opposite way the
Government did. But this gloss would "wrench the expectations raised by normal English usage." This qualifying language "confirms that a state offense whose elements include the elements of a felony punishable under the CSA is an aggravated felony." Furthermore, the fact that the Government had never prosecuted anyone under § 924(c) where the underlying "drug trafficking crime" was a state felony but a federal misdemeanor belied the Government's interpretation. Moreover, the Government's interpretation would make
449:
Supreme Court is the ultimate arbiter of the meaning of federal law, including the meaning of words
Congress uses when it crafts statutes. Congress could have expressly relied on state law to classify crimes as aggravated felonies. Since it did not, the Court reasoned, the class of crimes that constitute aggravated felonies must be defined in federal law. Hence, "unless a state offense is punishable as a federal felony it does not count" as an "aggravated felony."
470:
defining this category of aggravated felony. Put another way, it was not clear that
Congress intended that a state conviction for felony possession of up to 30 grams of marijuana—a crime treated as a misdemeanor under federal law—should count as an aggravated felony while a state conviction for misdemeanor possession of 5 grams of cocaine—a crime treated as a felony under federal law—should not.
441:
This interpretation ignored the fact that to qualify as an "aggravated felony," the crime in question had to relate to trafficking in a controlled substance. Possession is not trafficking, the Court reasoned, because possession lacks a connection to commerce. "Reading § 924(c) the
Government's way, then, would turn simple possession into trafficking, just what the
460:
The
Government pointed out that the term "aggravated felony" applies to any offense "whether in violation of Federal or State law." This qualification, it argued, showed that Congress intended for state law to determine whether conduct qualified as an aggravated felony. The Court read this language
452:
In the Court's opinion, Government's gloss on the statutory phrase was not consistent with ordinary
English usage. Because the words "punishable under the Controlled Substances Act" followed directly after the word "punishable," the Court reasoned that the most sensible meaning of the phrase was "a
448:
As the INA provides, all "felonies punishable under the
Controlled Substances Act" are drug trafficking crimes; thus, the place to go to determine what crimes are "felonies punishable under the Controlled Substances Act" is the Act itself. The term "aggravated felony" is one of federal law, and the
483:
accepted the
Government's interpretation of the phrase "felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act." Because Lopez's crime was a felony under South Dakota law, and the CSA provided for punishment for his crime, he had committed an aggravated felony. "The classification depends only on
436:
a felony under the CSA unless the amount of the drug possessed is greater than that normally kept for personal use. Where federal law treats certain conduct as a misdemeanor, and state law treats that same conduct as a felony, does that conduct constitute an "aggravated felony" or not? To answer
440:
The
Government argued that Lopez's South Dakota conviction qualified as an aggravated felony because it was (1) a felony, because South Dakota law made it a felony; that (2) was punishable under the CSA, because it is a crime under the CSA to possess a controlled substance, albeit a misdemeanor.
380:
Lopez entered the United States illegally from Mexico in 1986, but became a lawful permanent resident in 1990. In 1997, he pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting the possession of cocaine in a South Dakota court, and served 15 months in prison. When he was released, the INS sought to deport him
469:
criminal law, at least with respect to alien removal and eligibility for asylum. If
Congress had meant the term "aggravated felony" to bear some generic meaning, and thus to depend to some extent on state law, it would not have expressly referenced another federal statute, such as § 924(c), in
216:
Conduct that is a misdemeanor under the federal Controlled Substances Act is not a "felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act," and hence an aggravated felony that makes an eligible for deportation, even if that conduct constitutes a felony under state
429:)." The term "aggravated felony" "applies to an offense whether in violation of Federal of State law and applies to such an offense in violation of the law of a foreign country for which the term of imprisonment was completed within the previous 15 years."
364:. The other is that, with respect to certain federal crimes, a prior conviction for an aggravated felony provides a sentencing enhancement. In this case, Lopez had been convicted of conduct that was a felony under
400:
wrote for the majority. As is frequently the case with regard to immigration cases, the Court had to examine the interplay of federal and state laws that are complex in their phrasing. Under the
631:
636:
389:, which the court denied. Because there was a conflict in the federal courts of appeals on how to classify crimes such as Lopez's, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.
360:. Under federal law, there are two main consequences of having a prior conviction for an "aggravated felony." One is that, if the convicted person is an alien, he will be
381:
because, it claimed, he had been convicted of a controlled substances violation and an "aggravated felony." An Immigration Judge ordered him deported, and the
651:
386:
199:
152:
432:
Under South Dakota law, aiding and abetting the possession of cocaine is equivalent to possessing cocaine, and that crime is a felony. Mere possession is
598:
53:
408:
includes "illicit trafficking in a controlled substance... including a drug trafficking crime (as defined in section 924(c) of Title 18)."
661:
626:
641:
401:
607:
656:
646:
416:(a)(43)(B). A "drug trafficking crime," in turn, refers to "any felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act (
417:
369:
327:
105:
570:
409:
319:
75:
46:
593:
578:
437:
this question, the Court had to parse the phrase "any felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act."
382:
191:
583:
353:
36:
543:
494:
40:
32:
175:
525:
588:
57:
144:
534:
445:
tells us not to expect, and that result makes us very wary of the Government's position."
8:
272:
516:
552:
133:
405:
240:
442:
195:
479:
421:
413:
331:
323:
264:
252:
147:
276:
248:
620:
124:
Jose Antonio Lopez v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States
301:
Souter, joined by Roberts, Stevens, Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito
397:
365:
356:, regardless of whether state law classifies such conduct as a felony or a
284:
260:
232:
561:
372:
ruled that this conviction could not serve as a basis for deporting him.
361:
357:
612:
from the New York State Defenders Association Immigrant Defense Project
385:
ultimately affirmed that decision. Lopez petitioned for review in the
203:
163:
159:
425:
368:
law but was a misdemeanor under federal law. Accordingly, the
346:
100:
498:: state misdemeanor conviction that would be a federal felony
584:
Brief of the Solicitor General on behalf of the Government
349:" includes only conduct punishable as a felony under the
632:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
637:
United States immigration and naturalization case law
618:
45:but its sources remain unclear because it lacks
345:, 549 U.S. 47 (2006), held that an "aggravated
465:immigration law dependent on the vagaries of
652:United States controlled substances case law
603:from the American Immigration Law Foundation
594:Amicus brief of the American Bar Association
76:Learn how and when to remove this message
571:Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived)
512:, 549 U.S. 47 (2006) is available from:
392:
619:
484:the authorized term of imprisonment."
473:
88:2006 United States Supreme Court case
17:
457:by the Controlled Substances Act."
13:
106:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
673:
627:United States Supreme Court cases
502:
190:Order of removal affirmed by the
99:
22:
402:Immigration and Nationality Act
662:Mexico–United States relations
642:2006 in United States case law
1:
657:Legal history of South Dakota
375:
647:Cocaine in the United States
383:Board of Immigration Appeals
206:granted, 547 U.S. ___ (2005)
192:Board of Immigration Appeals
7:
608:Information about applying
599:Information about applying
487:
10:
678:
562:Oyez (oral argument audio)
579:Brief of Petitioner Lopez
354:Controlled Substances Act
318:
313:
305:
297:
292:
226:
221:
215:
210:
186:
181:
171:
139:
129:
119:
112:
98:
93:
589:Amicus brief of the ACLU
495:Burgess v. United States
115:Decided December 5, 2006
31:This article includes a
194:; petition denied, 417
60:more precise citations.
113:Argued October 3, 2006
393:Opinion of the Court
158:127 S. Ct. 625; 166
273:Ruth Bader Ginsburg
474:Dissenting opinion
453:felony punishable
370:U.S. Supreme Court
237:Associate Justices
33:list of references
510:Lopez v. Gonzales
406:aggravated felony
342:Lopez v. Gonzales
338:
337:
94:Lopez v. Gonzales
86:
85:
78:
669:
575:
569:
566:
560:
557:
551:
548:
542:
539:
533:
530:
524:
521:
515:
443:English language
222:Court membership
103:
102:
91:
90:
81:
74:
70:
67:
61:
56:this article by
47:inline citations
26:
25:
18:
677:
676:
672:
671:
670:
668:
667:
666:
617:
616:
573:
567:
564:
558:
555:
549:
546:
540:
537:
531:
528:
522:
519:
513:
505:
490:
476:
395:
378:
275:
265:Clarence Thomas
263:
253:Anthony Kennedy
251:
241:John P. Stevens
167:
114:
108:
89:
82:
71:
65:
62:
51:
37:related reading
27:
23:
12:
11:
5:
675:
665:
664:
659:
654:
649:
644:
639:
634:
629:
615:
614:
605:
596:
591:
586:
581:
576:
544:Google Scholar
504:
503:External links
501:
500:
499:
489:
486:
480:Justice Thomas
475:
472:
418:21 U.S.C.
398:Justice Souter
394:
391:
387:Eighth Circuit
377:
374:
336:
335:
328:18 U.S.C.
316:
315:
311:
310:
307:
303:
302:
299:
295:
294:
290:
289:
288:
287:
277:Stephen Breyer
249:Antonin Scalia
238:
235:
230:
224:
223:
219:
218:
213:
212:
208:
207:
188:
184:
183:
179:
178:
173:
169:
168:
157:
141:
137:
136:
131:
127:
126:
121:
120:Full case name
117:
116:
110:
109:
104:
96:
95:
87:
84:
83:
41:external links
30:
28:
21:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
674:
663:
660:
658:
655:
653:
650:
648:
645:
643:
640:
638:
635:
633:
630:
628:
625:
624:
622:
613:
611:
606:
604:
602:
597:
595:
592:
590:
587:
585:
582:
580:
577:
572:
563:
554:
545:
536:
527:
526:CourtListener
518:
511:
507:
506:
497:
496:
492:
491:
485:
482:
481:
471:
468:
464:
458:
456:
450:
446:
444:
438:
435:
430:
428:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
410:8 U.S.C.
407:
403:
399:
390:
388:
384:
373:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
352:
348:
344:
343:
333:
329:
325:
321:
320:8 U.S.C.
317:
312:
308:
304:
300:
296:
293:Case opinions
291:
286:
282:
278:
274:
270:
266:
262:
258:
254:
250:
246:
242:
239:
236:
234:
231:
229:Chief Justice
228:
227:
225:
220:
214:
209:
205:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
180:
177:
176:Oral argument
174:
170:
165:
161:
155:
154:
149:
146:
142:
138:
135:
132:
128:
125:
122:
118:
111:
107:
97:
92:
80:
77:
69:
59:
55:
49:
48:
42:
38:
34:
29:
20:
19:
16:
609:
600:
509:
493:
478:
477:
466:
462:
459:
454:
451:
447:
439:
433:
431:
424:
396:
379:
366:South Dakota
350:
341:
340:
339:
326:(a)(43)(B);
314:Laws applied
285:Samuel Alito
280:
268:
261:David Souter
256:
244:
233:John Roberts
182:Case history
151:
123:
72:
63:
52:Please help
44:
15:
414:§ 1101
358:misdemeanor
324:§ 1101
66:August 2019
58:introducing
621:Categories
422:§ 801
404:(INA), an
376:Background
332:§ 924
164:U.S. LEXIS
162:462; 2006
130:Docket no.
160:L. Ed. 2d
140:Citations
508:Text of
488:See also
362:deported
298:Majority
200:8th Cir.
172:Argument
535:Findlaw
517:Cornell
463:federal
455:as such
426:et seq.
351:federal
306:Dissent
211:Holding
202:2005);
54:improve
574:
568:
565:
559:
556:
553:Justia
550:
547:
541:
538:
532:
529:
523:
520:
514:
420:
412:
347:felony
334:(c)(2)
330:
322:
309:Thomas
283:
281:·
279:
271:
269:·
267:
259:
257:·
255:
247:
245:·
243:
134:05-547
610:Lopez
601:Lopez
467:state
204:cert.
198:934 (
187:Prior
39:, or
217:law.
196:F.3d
166:9442
153:more
145:U.S.
143:549
434:not
623::
148:47
43:,
35:,
156:)
150:(
79:)
73:(
68:)
64:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.