Subscribe

Why Supreme Court sided with white supremacist

The high court ruled in favor of Samuel Johnson, a Minnesota white supremacist, who had been sentenced to 15 years in prison under the federal Armed Career Criminal Act.

  • close
    The Supreme Court building in Washington, June 30, 2014.
    Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP/File
    View Caption
  • About video ads
    View Caption
of

The US Supreme Court on Friday voted 6 to 3 to throw out part of a federal criminal sentencing law for being too broad.

The federal Armed Career Criminal Act imposes a minimum 15-year sentence when a defendant is convicted of possessing a firearm and has already been convicted of at least three qualifying crimes, including violent felonies, burglary, and arson.

The court ruled in favor of Samuel Johnson, a Minnesota white supremacist, who was given 15 years in prison for illegally possessing firearms.

The judge in Johnson's case told him if owning a sawed-off shotgun didn’t count as a violent felony, Mr. Johnson would have gotten 10 years or less. 

Judge Richard Kyle doled out the additional sentence to Johnson in 2012 when he pleaded guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm. He had previously been convicted of robbery on two occasions and possessing a short-barreled shotgun.

Johnson’s attorneys found a particular issue with the additional provision that the law also applies to previous convictions that concern “conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.”

This meant, the risk of serious injury – which includes possessing firearms – took precedence, even if the crime didn’t actually involve violence – use of the firearm.

Johnson’s lawyers argued mere possession of the gun should not count as a violent felony. They said the initial ruling violated the US Constitution’s Fifth Amendment, which mandates due process under law. The majority of the justices ultimately agreed.

With the reformed law, Johnson will now be resentenced and face a maximum sentence of 10 years.

The ruling could also affect other inmates in similar situations to Johnson. According to Vox, there are about 7,000 prisoners serving time under this act – most of whom, however, would be unaffected by the specific change in the law.

This report includes material from Reuters.

About these ads
Sponsored Content by LockerDome
 
 
Make a Difference
Inspired? Here are some ways to make a difference on this issue.
FREE Newsletters
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.
 

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

Loading...

Loading...

Loading...

Save for later

Save
Cancel

Saved ( of items)

This item has been saved to read later from any device.
Access saved items through your user name at the top of the page.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You reached the limit of 20 saved items.
Please visit following link to manage you saved items.

View Saved Items

OK

Failed to save

You have already saved this item.

View Saved Items

OK