Skip to content
National Association of Attorneys General
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
      • Center for Consumer Protection
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • ConsumerResources.org
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us
National Association of Attorneys General
  • Find My AG
  • Consumer Complaints
  • Member Benefits
  • Contact Us
Log In
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
      • Center for Consumer Protection
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • ConsumerResources.org
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us

Supreme Court Report: Pulsifer v. United States, 22-340

Home / Supreme Court / Supreme Court Report: Pulsifer v. United States, 22-340
March 13, 2023 Supreme Court
Share this

  • Dan Schweitzer
    Director, Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
    National Association of Attorneys General

Volume 30, Issue 6: This Report summarizes opinions issued on February 22 and 28, 2023 (Part I); and cases granted review on February 27 and March 6, 2023 (Part II).

Case Granted Review: Pulsifer v. United States, 22-340

Pulsifer v. United States, 22-340. This case involves 18 U.S.C. §3553(f), the “safety valve” provision of the federal sentencing statute. If a defendant satisfies the five sets of criteria in subsections (f)(1) through (f)(5), the district court is not required to impose a mandatory-minimum sentence. A defendant meets (f)(1) if he “does not have—(A) more than 4 criminal history points . . .; (B) a prior 3-point offense . . .; and (C) a prior 2-point violent offense.” 18 U.S.C. §3553(f)(1) (emphasis added). The Court will decide whether a defendant satisfies (f)(1) only if he does not have all three of (A), (B), and (C).

Petitioner Mark Pulsifer pleaded guilty to distributing 50 grams or more of methamphetamine. Given his criminal history, he faced a mandatory-minimum sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment. At sentencing, Pulsifer argued that he was entitled to safety-valve relief under §3553(f). Regarding (f)(1), Pulsifer acknowledged that he did not meet (A) or (B), because has more than 4 criminal history points and two prior 3-point offenses. But Pulsifer does not have a prior 2-point violent offense, as described in (C). Reading the statute as disqualifying a defendant only if he has all three of (A), (B), and (C), Pulsifer contended that he satisfied (f)(1). The district court rejected Pulsifer’s argument and sentenced him to 162 months of imprisonment after applying the mandatory minimum. The Eighth Circuit affirmed. 39 F.4th 1018.

The Eighth Circuit interpreted §3553(f)(1) as precluding eligibility for safety-valve relief if the defendant has any one of (A), (B), or (C). The court agreed with Pulsifer that the statute uses the word “and” in the conjunctive. But it favored a “distributive” reading of “and” over a “joint” reading, meaning “that the requirement that a defendant ‘does not have’ certain elements of criminal history is distributed across the three subsections, and a defendant is ineligible if he fails any one of the three conditions.” The court reasoned that there was a “strong textual basis to prefer a distributive reading of ‘and’ in §3553(f)” because if “and” is read jointly, subsection (A) is rendered superfluous. That is, under a joint reading, a “defendant who has a prior three-point offense under subsection (B) and a prior two-point violent offense under subsection (C) would always meet the criterion in subsection (A), because he would always have more than four criminal history points.” “Only the distributive interpretation avoids surplusage,” the court concluded.

Pulsifer argues that “and” means “and,” such that “a defendant remains eligible for safety-valve relief unless he has (A) more than 4 points, (B) a 3-point offense, and (C) a 2-point violent offense.” He submits that it is the ordinary-English view of the word “and.” Pulsifer also invokes the “conjunctive negative proof,” under which the phrase “you must not do A, B, and C” forbids doing the combination of all three things. Further, he utilizes the “presumption of consistent usage”—that “and” in one place in the statute means the same thing as “and” somewhere else.” Pulsifer notes that in “§3553(f), Congress used ‘and’ to join both subsections (2) through (5) and conditions (A) through (C) in subsection (1)—all in the very same sentence.” He questions, “Why would ‘and’ mean ‘or’ in (f)(1) but ‘and’ when connecting (f)(1) through (f)(5)?” As for whether his reading of the statute creates surplusage, Pulsifer contends that that canon cannot override the “ordinary, plain meaning” of “and.” Finally, he maintains that the Court must resolve any ambiguity in the statute in his favor under the rule of lenity.

The Government endorses the Eighth Circuit’s analysis. It argues that “Section 3553(f)(1)’s prefatory phrase—“the defendant does not have”—is best read to modify subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) ‘severally.’” In other words, “a defendant is eligible for safety-valve relief if he does not have (A), does not have (B), and does not have (C).” Like the Eighth Circuit, the Government invokes the surplusage canon to support its interpretation of the statute. The Government also suggests that Pulsifer’s reading would lead to absurd results, as a defendant with a couple dozen criminal-history points would be eligible for safety-valve relief so long as he does not have a prior two-point violent offense.

Related Posts

Related Posts

Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 20

Supreme Court Report, Volume 31, Issue 13

Supreme Court Report, Volume 32, Issue 6

Connect with NAAG and the Attorney General Community

Create a NAAG account to subscribe to our newsletters or mailing lists.

Create Account
Subscribe
Marble columns and the top of a federal building

scroll to filters

White Logo for the National Association of Attorneys General

1850 M Street NW
12th floor
Washington, DC 20036

TEL 202-326-6000
EMAIL 

Youtube
  • Issues
    • Issues
      • Anticorruption
      • Antitrust
      • Bankruptcy
      • Charities
      • Civil Law
    • Issues
      • Consumer Protection
      • Criminal Law
      • Cyber and Technology
      • Disaster Preparedness & Response
      • Elder Justice
    • Issues
      • Ethics
      • Human Trafficking
      • Medicaid Fraud
      • Opioids
      • Powers & Duties
    • Issues
      • Public Health
      • The U.S. Supreme Court
      • Tobacco
      • Veterans & Military
  • Our Work
    • Training & Research
    • Centers
      • Center for Supreme Court Advocacy
      • Center for Tobacco & Public Health
      • Center for Consumer Protection
    • Committees
    • Initiatives
      • Presidential Initiative
      • Strategic Partnerships
      • ConsumerResources.org
      • International Fellows
      • COVID-19
    • Bankruptcy
    • Policy & Advocacy
  • Events & Training
    • Event Calendar
    • Attorney General Symposium
    • Presidential Summit
    • Capital Forum
    • Region Meetings
    • CLE Credit
    • NAAG Trainings
    • Online Learning
    • NAMFCU Trainings
    • NAAG Faculty
  • News & Resources
    • Attorney General Journal
    • Reports & Publications
    • Newsroom
    • NAAG Policy Letters
    • Podcasts
    • Online Learning
    • Research & Data
    • Member Directory
  • Attorneys General
    • What Attorneys General Do
    • Who is my Attorney General?
    • Attorneys General Office 101
    • Research & Data
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Careers in Attorney General Offices
    • Careers in Medicaid Fraud Control Units
  • About NAAG
    • NAAG Staff
    • NAAG Leadership
    • NAAG Member Services
    • NAAG Regions
    • NAAG FAQs
    • SAGE
    • NAMFCU
    • Newsroom
    • Careers at NAAG
  • Find my AG
  • About NAMFCU
    • About the Medicaid Fraud Control Units
    • Reporting Fraud and Abuse
    • MFCU Member Hub
    • Careers with a MFCU
  • Contact Us
  • Find My AG
  • Consumer Complaints
  • Member Benefits
  • Contact Us
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Privacy & Cookies Notice
  • Sitemap
  • Member Login

About the National Association of Attorneys General

As the nonpartisan national forum for America's state and territory attorneys general and their staff, NAAG provides collaboration, insight, and expertise to empower and champion America's attorneys general.
Learn More

© 2025 Copyright National Association of Attorneys General

Website by Yoko Co

Internal Feedback / Report an Error

Request an Update / Report an Error

The change you are requesting will be linked to this page. The URL for the page will be included in a hidden field when the form is submitted.
Please enter your change or describe your request. Be sure to reference where the error appears on the page and what needs to be done specifically.
Upload any files that need to be linked to this page. PDF only. Submit another request if you have more than five files to upload.
Drop files here or
Accepted file types: pdf, docx, xls, Max. file size: 50 MB, Max. files: 5.

    Who is requesting this change?(Required)

    Scroll To Top
    To provide you more clarity about how we collect, store and use personal information, and your rights to control that information, we have updated our privacy policy, which also explains how we use cookies. You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.I Agree