Ruth Bader Ginsburg

“ Congress meant:
" [I] f another provision of the United States Code mandates a punishment for using, carrying, or possessing a firearm in connection with a drug trafficking crime or crime of violence, and that minimum sentence is longer than the punishment applicable under §924 (c) , then the longer sentence applies." Brief for United States 17. This reading gives effect to the statutory language commanding that all §924 (c) offenders shall receive additional punishment for their violation of that provision, a command reiterated three times. ”

“ The "except" clause, they urge, ensures that §924 (c) offenders will serve at least five years in prison. If conviction on a different count yields a mandatory sentence exceeding five years, they maintain, the statutory requirement is satisfied and the penalty specified for the §924 (c) violation becomes inoperative.
The courts below, agreeing with the Government's construction of the statute, read §924 (c) (1) as independently requiring a sentence of at least five years, tacked onto any other sentence the defendant receives. ”

“ Given Abbott's extensive criminal history, his felon-in-possession conviction triggered a 15-year mandatory minimum under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) , 18 U.S.C. §924 (e) . The District Court sentenced Abbott to the 15 years man-
page 4, slip opinion dated by ACCA, and to an additional five years for the §924 (c) violation, yielding a total prison term of 20 years. [1]
Gould's indictment listed seven separate drug and firearm charges. In return for Gould's agreement to plead guilty, the Government dropped all but two: one §924 (c) offense and one predicate drug-trafficking crime. ”

“ Congress could have excised all prescriptions ordering that §924 (c) sentences shall run consecutively to other sentences. Without such a requirement, all defendants would benefit from a minimum-plus-Guidelines regime—not just the most culpable offenders. Congress did not adopt that obvious solution, we think, because it did not want the Guidelines to supplant §924 (c) .
C
The Government's reading of the "except" clause, we are convinced, makes far more sense than the interpretations urged by Abbott and Gould. In imposing a sentence for a
↑ 6 Firearms Owners' Protection Act, 1986, Pub. ”

“ Gould Brief 30–32. On this view, the "except" clause ensures that a §924 (c) offender incurs a minimum sentence of considerable length; the Guidelines would then control, elevating that sentence based on firearm possession or use. See United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual §§2D1.1 (b) (1) , 2K2.1 (b) (5) (Nov. 1998) (increasing offense level for defendants who use or possess firearms in course of violent crime or drug trafficking) ; §§2D1.1 (b) (1) , 2K2.1 (b) (6) (Nov. 2009) (same) .
We do not gainsay that Abbott and Gould project a rational, less harsh, mode of sentencing. ”

“ Instead, according to the courts below and the Government here, the "except" clause applies only when another provision—whether contained within or placed outside §924 (c) —commands a
page 3, slip opinion longer term for conduct violating §924 (c) . For example,the mandatory minimum sentence for a §924 (c) offense is five years, but if the firearm is brandished, the minimum rises to seven years, and if the firearm is discharged, to ten years. §924 (c) (1) (A) (i) , (ii) , (iii) . ”

“ If he possessed,brandished, and discharged a gun, the mandatory penalty would be 10 years, not 22. He is, however, subject to the highest mandatory minimum specified for his conduct in §924 (c) , unless another provision of law directed to conduct proscribed by §924 (c) imposes an even greater mandatory minimum. ”

“ Gould's sentence would stand under Abbott's alternative construction.
page 11, slip opinion Clerk of Court's case file) . Congress, however, imposed only a five-year minimum for firearm possession "in furtherance of" a drug offense. As construed by Abbott and Gould, the amendment to include firearm possession as a §924 (c) offense would spare the most serious drug offenders from any discrete punishment for the very firearm activity the amendment targeted. "We are disinclined to say that what Congress imposed with one hand...it withdrew with the other.... ”