United States v. Taylor

Summary

The Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch joined by seven Members, held that attempted Hobbs Act robbery is not a "crime of violence" under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A): applying the categorical approach, no element of the offense requires proof that the defendant used, attempted to use, or threatened to use physical force, so the offense cannot support a §924(c) conviction or its additional decade of imprisonment. The Court rejected the government's three theories — that the elements clause reaches attempts, that a "substantial step" categorically entails a threatened use of force, and that usual prosecutorial practice can supply the missing element — and affirmed the Fourth Circuit's vacatur of Taylor's §924(c) conviction and remand for resentencing. Justices Thomas and Alito each filed dissenting opinions: Thomas would overrule Davis and adopt a conduct-based approach reviving the residual clause, while Alito would treat the Hobbs Act's alternative means as independent elements making the attempt a crime of violence.