Concepcion v. United States | Case No. 20-1650 | Date Argued: 1/19/2022 | Date Decided: 6/27/2022Question Presented: [cannot locate]Holding: The First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence.Result: Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED.Voting Breakdown: 5-4. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices Thomas, Breyer, Kagan and Gorsuch joined. Justice Kavanaugh filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito and Barrett joined.Link to Opinion: <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1650_new_4gci.pdf">Here</a>.Oral Advocates:For Petitioner: Charles L. McCloud, Washington, D.C. For Respondent: Matthew Guarnieri, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

Concepcion v. United States | Case No. 20-1650 | Date Argued: 1/19/2022 | Date Decided: 6/27/2022 Question Presented: [cannot locate] Holding: The First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence. Result: Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED. Voting Breakdown: 5-4. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices Thomas, Breyer, Kagan and Gorsuch joined. Justice Kavanaugh filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito and Barrett joined. Link to Opinion: Here. Oral Advocates: For Petitioner: Charles L. McCloud, Washington, D.C. For Respondent: Matthew Guarnieri, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

Concepcion v. United States | Case No. 20-1650 | Date Argued: 1/19/2022 | Date Decided: 6/27/2022Question Presented: [cannot locate]Holding: The First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence.Result: Judgment REVERSED and case REMANDED.Voting Breakdown: 5-4. Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justices Thomas, Breyer, Kagan and Gorsuch joined. Justice Kavanaugh filed a dissenting opinion, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito and Barrett joined.Link to Opinion: <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1650_new_4gci.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer">Here</a>.Oral Advocates:For Petitioner: Charles L. McCloud, Washington, D.C. For Respondent: Matthew Guarnieri, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C.

Oral Argument: Concepcion v. United States | Case No. 20-1650 | Date Argued: 1/19/2022 | Date Decided: 6/27/2022

The High Court Report makes Supreme Court decisions accessible to everyone.
We deliver comprehensive SCOTUS coverage without the legal jargon or partisan spin—just clear analysis that explains how these cases affect your life, business, and community.

What you get: Case previews and breakdowns, raw oral argument audio, curated key exchanges, detailed opinion analysis, and expert commentary from a practicing attorney who's spent 12 years in courtrooms arguing the same types of cases the Supreme Court hears.

Why it works: Whether you need a focused 10-minute update or a deep constitutional dive, episodes are designed for busy professionals, engaged citizens, and anyone who wants to understand how the Court shapes America.

When we publish: 3-5 episodes weekly during the Court's October-June term, with summer coverage of emergency orders and retrospective analysis.

Growing archive: Oral arguments back to 2020 and expanding, so you can hear how landmark cases unfolded and track the Court's evolution.
Your direct line to understanding the Supreme Court—accessible, thorough, and grounded in real legal expertise.**

Business

Education

Government

The High Court Report makes Supreme Court decisions accessible to everyone. We deliver comprehensive SCOTUS coverage without the legal jargon or partisan spin—just clear analysis that explains how these cases affect your life, business, and community. What you get: Case previews and breakdowns, raw oral argument audio, curated key exchanges, detailed opinion analysis, and expert commentary from a practicing attorney who's spent 12 years in courtrooms arguing the same types of cases the Supreme Court hears. Why it works: Whether you need a focused 10-minute update or a deep constitutional dive, episodes are designed for busy professionals, engaged citizens, and anyone who wants to understand how the Court shapes America. When we publish: 3-5 episodes weekly during the Court's October-June term, with summer coverage of emergency orders and retrospective analysis. Growing archive: Oral arguments back to 2020 and expanding, so you can hear how landmark cases unfolded and track the Court's evolution. Your direct line to understanding the Supreme Court—accessible, thorough, and grounded in real legal expertise.**

Share Oral Argument: Concepcion v. United States | Case No. 20-1650 | Date Argued: 1/19/2022 | Date Decided: 6/27/2022

Sign up to save your podcasts

Oral Argument: Concepcion v. United States | Case No. 20-1650 | Date Argued: 1/19/2022 | Date Decided: 6/27/2022

Oral Argument: Concepcion v. United States | Case No. 20-1650 | Date Argued: 1/19/2022 | Date Decided: 6/27/2022

More shows like The High Court Report

The NPR Politics Podcast

Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts

Bloomberg Law

Law Talk With Epstein, Yoo & Cooke

We the People

The Fifth Column

The Lawfare Podcast

The Daily

Stay Tuned with Preet

Today, Explained

Interesting Times with Ross Douthat

Strict Scrutiny

Advisory Opinions

The Ezra Klein Show

Divided Argument