Anderson v. United States

Background

A person asked the Supreme Court to review a ruling from the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and sought permission to proceed without paying court fees. The Court granted the fee motion, took the petition, then vacated the lower-court judgment and sent the case back to the First Circuit for further consideration after the Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States.

Reasoning

The key question was whether the earlier decision should stand now that the Court addressed the Armed Career Criminal Act’s so-called residual clause in Johnson. Following the Solicitor General’s recommendation, the Court held the petition, and after Johnson it vacated and remanded so the appeals court can reassess the case under the new ruling. The Court explicitly said its action does not decide whether the person is entitled to relief; it simply requires the lower court to reconsider the case in light of Johnson.

Real world impact

This order sends cases that relied on the ACCA residual clause back to appeals courts for renewed review. People whose sentences or convictions depended on that clause may get reconsideration, but this is not a final win and outcomes may vary with procedural details in each case.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Alito wrote separately to emphasize that the Court’s decision to grant, vacate, and remand does not express any view about whether the petitioner ultimately should receive relief and noted the Solicitor General’s role in recommending the approach.