Document Type

Brief

Case Name

John L. Yates v. United States of America

Publication Date

7-2014

Abstract

No. 13-7451
John L. Yates v. United States of America

On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

From the Summary of Argument

The modern federal criminal code is vast and unwieldy: some 4,500 laws criminalize conduct ranging from stockpiling biological weapons (18 U.S.C. § 175) to falsely representing oneself as a 4-H Club representative (id. § 916). Moreover, a host of these laws are redundant. Indeed, some federal crimes—notably fraud and false statements—are independently prohibited by over two hundred different statutes. Combined with over 300,000 federal criminal regulations, the canon benefits only the Government, which has a near-endless menu of charging options in a typical prosecution.

Redundancy, however, is but one troubling consequence of the ever-growing criminal code. Vagueness is another. As evidenced by the number of times this Court has needed to interpret, and re-interpret, certain federal crimes, much of Title 18 and its regulatory counterparts fail to provide the public with fair warning of what conduct is prohibited. This is true on both a macro level—the canon is too vast to comprehend—and a micro level—many individual provisions are poorly drawn.

Comments

Amici are eighteen professors of criminal law from across the political and ideological spectrum. Their views on many topics vary widely. Amici are united, however, in the view that the growing problem of overcriminalization requires a principled response from the judiciary.

See the listing on pages A1-A6, including Notre Dame Law School's Richard W. Garnett and Stephen F. Smith.

Download

Share

COinS