No. 18-216
Judith Ann Paixao and Kevin A. Lombard v. United States
Response Waived
Tags: 18-usc-666(b) criminal-law federal-assistance federal-assistance-program fraud judicial-review justice-thomas-dissent lower-court-interpretation reconsideration-of-precedent statutory-construction statutory-interpretation supreme-court-precedent veterans-affairs vocational-rehabilitation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2018-09-24
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Court should reconsider Fischer v. United States, 529 U.S. 667 (2000), because the lower courts have interpreted it such that 'any funds flowing from a federal assistance program [are] deemed 'benefits' within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 666(b)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW Whether the Court should reconsider Fischer v. United States, 529 U.S. 667, 686 (2000), because, as Justice Thomas’s dissent predicted, the lower courts have interpreted it such that “any funds flowing from a federal assistance program [are] deemed ‘benefits’” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 666(b).
Docket Entries
2018-10-01
Petition DENIED.
2018-08-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
2018-08-24
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-08-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due September 19, 2018)
Attorneys
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Judith Paixao, et al.
Devin Jai Burstein — Warren & Burstein, Petitioner