Whether the prior-conviction exception to the Apprendi rule can be squared with the historical practices codified in the Sixth Amendment, and if not, whether Almendarez-Torres should be overruled

QUESTION PRESENTED The Sixth Amendment protects the right “to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation.” U.S. Const. amend. VI. In Apprendi v. New Jersey, this Court held that “fact[s] that increase[] the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt,” but it carved out an exception for prior convictions. Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 488-90 & n.15 (2000). It rooted the general rule in common-law historical practices, see id. at 477-83, but relied on an earlier v. United States—to support the prior-conviction exception, see id. at 487-90 (citing AImendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998)). But can Almendarez-Torres be squared with the historical practices codified in the Sixth Amendment; and if not, should this Court overrule AlmendarezTorres? i