Case Citator › Bailey v. United States

Bailey v. United States

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Superseded by statute
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
516 U.S. 137
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
239 of 239
Citing cases (total)
3,524
Treatment dates
2005
Superseded by statute
A reviewed court treats this case as superseded by later legislation. Bailey v. United States remains controlling on the meaning of “use,” but Congress superseded its holding that passive possession was insufficient to trigger § 924(c)'s mandatory minimum. All 239 flagged citations have been read.
More on how this was screened

The 1998 amendment added possession of a firearm in furtherance of the predicate crime as a separate route to liability; United States v. Beaudion expressly confirmed that limited statutory displacement. The 1 confirmed treatment is listed below. The other citing opinions applied Bailey's surviving active-employment rule, described Bailey's effect on older precedent, copied treatment history, or addressed unrelated authorities.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

3,524 later cases cite Bailey v. United States; 239 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Bailey v. United States?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Superseded by Statute

  • Congress's 1998 amendment to § 924(c) superseded Bailey's holding that passive possession could not trigger the five-year mandatory minimum by adding possession in furtherance as an alternative.

    United States v. Beaudion · Ninth Circuit · filed

    Subsequent congressional amendment of § 924(c)(1) superseded the Court's holding in Bailey that possession of a firearm was insufficient to trigger the five-year mandatory minimum sentence. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A), as amended by Pub.L. No. 105-386, 112 Stat. 3469 (1998) (adding possession of a firearm in furtherance of the crime as action sufficient to apply the five-year mandatory minimum sentence).
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Bailey v. United States and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace