No. 18-7649

Sergeyi Bazar v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-01-29
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: caminetti-v-united-states criminal-law federal-law mann-act mann-act-18-usc-2422 prostitution sex-trafficking sexual-conduct sexual-intercourse statutory-interpretation supreme-court-precedent united-states-v-bitty
Key Terms:
Immigration Patent
Latest Conference: 2019-03-01
Question Presented (from Petition)

1. When Congress amended the Mann Act (18 U.S.C. § 2422) in 1986, did it overrule this Court's decisions in United States v. Bitty, 208 U.S. 393 (1908), and Caminetti v. United States, 242 U.S. 470 (1917), which defined prostitution under federal law as involving sexual intercourse?

2. Did Congress intend the term "sex act" in the sex-trafficking statute (18 U.S.C. 1591) to cover sexual conduct beyond oral, anal, and vaginal sex?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

When Congress amended the Mann Act (18 U.S.C. § 2422) in 1986, did it overrule this Court's decisions in United States v. Bitty, 208 U.S. 393 (1908), and Caminetti v. United States, 242 U.S. 470 (1917), which defined prostitution under federal law as involving sexual intercourse?

Docket Entries

2019-03-04
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/1/2019.
2019-02-08
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
Main Document
2019-01-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 28, 2019)
Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma PauperisPetitionProof of Service

Attorneys

Sergeyi Bazar
Doug Keller — Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent