Sekhar v. United States

Oral argument

• Argued

  59 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding “property” does not include coercing someone to recommend an investment
• explaining that “if a word is obviously transplanted 15Because the government is interpreting a provision of the INA, the Chevron framework applies. 60 from another legal source, whether the common law or other legislation, it brings the old soil with it”
• citing, inter alia, F. Wharton, Wharton’s Criminal Law § 178 at 296 (C. Torcia 14th ed. 1979)
• stating that Congress “did not define” the relevant terms
• declining to adopt an interpretation of a statute where “it would collapse the longstanding distinction between [forms of conduct] and - 32 - ignore [the legislature]’s choice to penalize one but not the other”
• requiring the “absentee of] other indication” for the presumption to apply

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).