Harris v. United States — Thomas, J., dissenting

Summary

Justice Thomas dissents, arguing that the fact of brandishing a firearm, which raises the mandatory minimum under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A), is an element of the crime that must be charged in the indictment and proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. He contends that this view aligns with Apprendi v. New Jersey and requires overruling McMillan v. Pennsylvania. The dissent maintains that the plurality’s distinction between facts that increase the statutory maximum and those that raise the mandatory minimum is untenable. He would reverse the Fourth Circuit and reaffirm Apprendi.