Thompson v. United States
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Thompson v. United States and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Thompson v. United States.
In Thompson v. United States, the Supreme Court addressed whether 18 U.S.C. § 1014, which criminalizes 'knowingly making any false statement' to influence the FDIC, also applies to misleading statements that are not false. Patrick Thompson was convicted for allegedly making false statements about his loan amounts to the FDIC. The lower courts upheld his conviction, interpreting the statute to include misleading statements. The Supreme Court vacated and remanded the case, clarifying the statute's scope.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Thompson v. United States.
The Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1014 does not criminalize statements that are misleading but not false.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Thompson v. United States. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Due Process is relevant to Thompson v. United States
The case involves the interpretation of a federal statute and its application, which relates to procedural due process in determining what constitutes a false statement under the law.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The question presented is whether § 1014 criminalizes statements that are misleading but not false.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Thompson v. United States that support the summary and concepts above.
Section 1014, which prohibits 'knowingly making any false statement,' does not criminalize statements that are misleading but not false.
The statutory text criminalizes 'false statements' but does not use the word 'misleading.'
Statutory context confirms that § 1014 does not cover all misleading statements.