Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/22-10_ifjn.pdf
Page Number: 14

10 

DUBIN v. UNITED STATES 

Opinion of the Court 

bears little resemblance to any ordinary meaning of “iden-
tity  theft.”    Consider  again  an  unlicensed  doctor  who  fills 
out a prescription actually requested by a patient; no one 
would  call  that  identity  theft.  Even  judges  below  who
agreed with the Government’s reading of §1028A(a)(1), and 
ultimately  the  Government  itself,  acknowledged  that  its 
reading of §1028A(a)(1) does not fairly capture the ordinary 
meaning of identity theft.  Nor is the difference just around
the  edges;  the  Government’s  reading  would,  in  practice, 
place garden-variety overbilling at the core of §1028A. 

Instead, “identity theft” has a focused meaning.  One dic-
tionary defines identity theft as “the fraudulent appropria-
tion and use of another person’s identifying data or docu-
ments, as a credit card.”  Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary 
xi (2d ed. 2001) (Webster’s).  Another similarly offers “[t]he 
unlawful taking and use of another person’s identifying in-
formation for fraudulent purposes; specif[ically] a crime in
which  someone  steals personal  information  about  and  be-
longing  to  another,  such  as  a  bank-account  number  or 
driver’s-license  number,  and  uses  the  information  to  de-
ceive others.”  Black’s Law Dictionary 894 (11th ed. 2019) 
(Black’s) (defining “identity theft”).6 

This supports a reading of “in relation to” where use of 
the means of identification is at the crux of the underlying
criminality.  These definitions refer to offenses built around 
what the defendant does with the means of identification in 
particular.  In other words, the means of identification spe-
cifically is a key mover in the criminality.  This central role 
played by the means of identification, which serves to des-
ignate a specific person’s identity, explains why we say that
the “identity” itself has been stolen.  See, e.g., Spears, 729 
F. 3d, at 756 (“identity theft” occurs when someone’s “iden-

—————— 

6 “Steal[ing]”  can,  of  course,  include  situations  where  something  was 

initially lawfully acquired.  See Black’s 1710 (defining “steal”).