Anthony Dick presents oral argument as amicus curiae before U.S. Supreme Court in case addressing deference owed to U.S. sentencing commission's Guidelines Manual under Stinson

Client(s) Anthony Dick as U.S. Supreme Court Appointed Amicus Curiae

Jones Day partner Anthony Dick argued as amicus curiae in Beaird v. United States, a case addressing a circuit split over whether the official commentary in the Guidelines Manual authoritatively interprets the Sentencing Guidelines and warrants controlling deference under Stinson v. United States.

In Stinson, the Court held that such commentary deserves deference, analogizing it to agencies' interpretations of their own regulations. The Court later narrowed some types of agency deference in Kisor v. Wilkie, prompting several circuits to hold that Stinson no longer governs.

In Beaird, the guideline range for petitioner's firearm-possession sentence was calculated in part based on the rules laid out in the commentary of the Guidelines Manual. The district court held that the commentary is entitled to deference under Stinson, and the Fifth Circuit affirmed. Beaird petitioned for certiorari arguing that Stinson no longer controls after Kisor, and the U.S. Solicitor General opposed certiorari but agreed with Beaird on the merits of the Stinson issue. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the circuit split and specially appointed Mr. Dick to defend the Fifth Circuit's decision, in support of the position that Stinson still correctly states the rule for deference owed to the Guidelines' commentary.

Beaird v. United States, No. 25-5343 (U.S.)