Oral Argument: Fernandez v. United States | Sentence Reduction Standoff: Compassion Versus Collateral Attack

Fernandez v. United States | Case No. 24-556 | Oral Argument Date: 11/12/25 | Docket Link: Here | The Sentence Reduction Standoff: Compassion Versus Collateral Attack Overview This is the Supreme Court oral arguments in the case called Fernandez v. United States. Fernandez seeks a sentence reduction under federal law. Fernandez argues legal changes since his sentencing constitute "extraordinary and compelling reasons" for reducing his sentence. The government argues these legal changes don't apply retroactively and cannot justify reduction. The central question: Can courts consider legal changes—even those that don't apply retroactively—as grounds for reducing previously imposed sentences? Oral Advocates: For Petitioner (Fernandez): Benjamin Gruenstein, New York, N.Y. For Respondent (United States): Eric J. Feigin, Deputy Solicitor General, 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 Overview [00:00:48] Argument Begins [00:00:57] Petitioner Opening Statement [00:03:10] Petitioner Free for All Questions [00:28:08] Petitioner Round Robin Questions [00:40:01] Respondent Opening Statement [00:42:17] Respondent Free for All Questions [01:10:17] Respondent Round Robin Questions [01:19:07] Petitioner Rebuttal