Supreme Court of the United States
Johnson v. United States — Alito, J., dissenting
March 2, 2010559 U.S. 133
Summary
Justice Alito, joined by Justice Thomas, dissented from the Court's interpretation of the Armed Career Criminal Act's phrase "physical force." He would have treated that phrase according to its traditional common-law meaning, which includes the unlawful offensive touching sufficient to constitute battery, and would therefore have affirmed the judgment below. The dissent also warned that the Court's narrower interpretation would exclude many qualifying battery convictions and undermine related federal firearm and immigration provisions.