Henderson v. United States (13-1487)

argument 13-1487

Henderson v. United States

Supreme Court of the United States 49 min 5 speakers 8 chapters transcribed 6 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the central legal question about felon‑in‑possession statutes in Henderson v. United States?

John G. Roberts 0:00

We'll hear argument first this morning in case thirteen fourteen eighty seven, Henderson versus the United States. Mr Ortiz.

Mr. Ortiz 0:08

Mr. Chief Justice, it may please the Court. This case asks whether the felon in possession statute prevents a court from ordering the government to transfer firearms in its possession that are owned by a felon to a suitable third party. The government now concedes that a court can order transfer to a licensed gun dealer who will then sell the firearms on the owner's behalf. That concession alone requires reversal. Neither court below understood that it had such power.

John G. Roberts 0:35

Why isn't is that enough for your client? He wants to sell the firearms, uh the government's willing to l let a licensed firearms dealer sell them for him.

Mr. Ortiz 0:44

Yes, Your Honor. He that is not his preferred uh remedy, but that is an acceptable remedy for him. Uh in fact it is one of the remedies that he uh he suggested below.

Unknown 0:56

I didn't I thought that before the And district court there was only first his friend, then his mother, and then another friend. Wh where did he ask the court to allow the guns to be sold by a licensed gun dealer.

Mr. Ortiz 1:16

Uh, Your Honor, you can see the references on page seventy-one, one hundred seventy, one thirty two, and page one hundred ninety five of the joint appendix. On page seventy one, in his renewed request for disposition of property, uh Mr. Henderson uh said that the own said that the owners, quote, have a property interest on the firearms which must be accommodated by the sale, transfer, or storage of the firearms in spite of his own possessor rights, having been On page one hundred seventy. That

Unknown 1:44

doesn't mention anything about gun dealer and he had been quite specific about the persons to whom he wanted the gun transferred?

Mr. Ortiz 1:53

Well, Your Honor, the in the uh in the Miller case which he cites there for the proposition that a sale would be an appropriate remedy, the sale was through uh license uh one of the possibilities was a sale through a licensed gun dealer.

Unknown 2:06

D is there any point in the the references that you made where he said to the court, I would like these guns to be uh consigned to a a licensed gun dealer.

Mr. Ortiz 2:21

He twice, Your Honor, did not he did not mention the word licensed gun dealer, but he said transfer for sale did not limit to any particular person. In on page one hundred thirty two, in his objections to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. He asked the court to grant the request that this court ordered that a person lawfully entit entitled to own the subject firearms collection be awarded possession and control when directly. Wasn't

Elena Kagan 2:47

he on a feudal mission in this circuit?

Mr. Ortiz 2:50

Yes, Your Honor, he wasn't a feudal mission in the circuit.

Elena Kagan 2:53

Because this circuit had already ruled that any kind of sale by anyone. was prohibited because he was a felon.

Mr. Ortiz 3:01

That is clear, Justice Homeyer. He was also

Elena Kagan 3:04

when he went up on appeal he cited the Brown case. to the court. to the circuit court. which had held that a court ordered sale was okay.

Mr. Ortiz 3:13

Yes, Your Honor.

Elena Kagan 3:14

And despite him citing the Brown case, the Eighth Circuit continued with its own precedent. and said no one could sell it, not even the court.

Mr. Ortiz 3:24

Yes, Your Honor. Uh he uh he he did make that clear to the eleventh circuit, uh but nowhere in his request for a sale or transfer below did he specifically limit it to someone who was not a licensed gun dealer. His uh request at the end of his objections to the magistrate judge's report uh is broad enough to contemplate that. I would have

John G. Roberts 3:47

thought I I would have thought you would oppose the notion that that would be an adequate uh adequate relief. If we're talking about an attribute of ownership, the owner gets to decide who to whom he is going to sell uh what he owns.

Mr. Ortiz 3:59

Yes, Your Honor. It is it it may in this particular case because it was one of the remedies that he actually requested be possible, but is not his preferred uh remedy. This court should have the power to approve sales and transfers so long as the recipients are not under the control or influence of the uh owner, so long as they themselves are legally entitled to own and possess the