Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-5904_i4dk.pdf
Page Number: 3.0

Cite as:  593 U. S. ____ (2021) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to 
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that 
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 20– 5904 
_________________ 

TARAHRICK TERRY, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 

[June 14, 2021]

 JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. 
In 1986, Congress established mandatory-minimum pen-
alties  for  cocaine  offenses.    If  the  quantity  of  cocaine  in-
volved in an offense exceeded a minimum threshold, then 
courts were required to impose a heightened sentence.  Con-
gress  set  the  quantity  thresholds  far  lower  for  crack  of-
fenses than for powder offenses.  But it has since narrowed 
the gap by increasing the thresholds for crack offenses more 
than fivefold.  The First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. 115–391,
132 Stat. 5194, makes those changes retroactive and gives
certain crack offenders an opportunity to receive a reduced 
sentence.  The question here is whether crack offenders who 
did not trigger a mandatory minimum qualify.  They do not. 

I 

In  the  mid-1980s,  the  United  States  witnessed  a  steep 
surge in the use of crack cocaine, and news of high-profile,
cocaine-related deaths permeated the media.  Witnesses be-
fore  Congress,  and  Members  of  Congress  themselves,  be-
lieved  that  a  “crack  epidemic”  was  also  fueling  a  crime 
wave.  Crack, they said, was far more addictive and danger-
ous than powder cocaine; it was cheaper and thus easier to