Oral Argument: Rutherford and Carter v. United States | Retroactivity Rebellion

Carter v. United States | Case No. 24-860 | Oral Argument Date: 11/12/25 | Docket Link: Here (consolidated with Rutherford v. United States | Case No. 24-820 | Docket Link: Here ) Overview Today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the consolidated cases Rutherford versus United States and Carter versus United States. These cases examine whether federal prisoners deserve relief based on changes Congress made to gun sentencing laws. Rutherford received 25 years for his second armed robbery—a sentence that would be only 7 years under today's laws. Congress eliminated brutal "stacking" penalties in 2018, but only for future defendants. Now Rutherford and Carter argue this massive disparity creates "extraordinary and compelling reasons" for sentence reductions. Can federal judges consider Congress's own recognition that old sentences were too harsh? Oral Advocates: For Petitioner (Rutherford): David Frederick, Washington, D.C. For Petitioner (Carter): David O'Neil, Washington, D.C. For Respondent (United States): Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Link to Opinion: TBD. Website Link to Opinion Summary: TBD. Website Link to Oral Argument: TBD. Timestamps: [00:00:00] Argument Preview [00:01:05] Argument Begins [00:01:13] Petitioner (Rutherford) Opening Statement [00:02:54] Petitioner (Rutherford) Free for All Questions [00:14:00] Petitioner (Rutherford) Round Robin Questions [00:30:04] Petitioner (Carter) Opening Statement [00:33:35] Petitioner (Carter) Free for All Questions [00:40:36] Petitioner (Carter) Round Robin Questions [00:47:52] Respondent Opening Statement [00:50:12] Respondent Free for All Questions [01:19:10] Respondent Round Robin Questions [01:19:24] Petitioner (Rutherford) Rebuttal