2025 term · Roberts Court · 6-3
Rutherford v. United States
608 U.S. 454
The record
- Term
- 2025
- Decided
- Issue area
- —
- Vote split
- 6-3
- Winning party
- —
- Decision direction
- —
- Chief Justice
- Roberts Court
- Disposition
- —
- Docket
- 24-820
- U.S. Reports
- 608 U.S. 454
- S. Ct. citation
- —
- LEXIS citation
- —
- Opinion by
- Amy Coney Barrett
Holding
When Congress declines to make a sentencing amendment retroactive—as with the change to 18 U. S. C. §924(c)—the resulting sentencing disparity cannot serve as an “extraordinary and compelling” reason that warrants a sentence reduction under §3582(c)(1)(A)(i).
How the bench divided
MMMMMMDDD
M 6 majorityD 3 dissenting
| Justice | Vote |
|---|---|
| Amy Coney Barrett | Majority |
| John G. Roberts | Majority |
| Clarence Thomas | Majority |
| Samuel Alito | Majority |
| Neil Gorsuch | Majority |
| Brett Kavanaugh | Majority |
| Sonia Sotomayor | Dissent |
| Elena Kagan | Dissent |
| Ketanji Brown Jackson | Dissent |
Read the opinion
- supremecourt.govSlip opinionThe opinion as released by the Court, in slip form.
- JustiaFull opinion textThe majority, concurring and dissenting opinions as handed down.
- supremecourt.govDocket 24-820Filings, orders and the procedural history on the Court’s own docket.
- OyezCase pageArgument audio and the vote lineup, when Oyez has published them.