Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/529bv.pdf
Page Number: 925

529US3

Unit: $U61

[11-02-00 07:34:21] PAGES PGT: OPIN

850

JONES v. UNITED STATES

Opinion of the Court

what conduct Congress has made a crime, it is appropriate, before choos-
ing the harsher alternative, to require that Congress should have spoken
in language that is clear and deﬁnite, United States v. Universal C. I. T.
Credit Corp., 344 U. S. 218, 221–222. Moreover, unless Congress con-
veys its purpose clearly, it will not be deemed to have signiﬁcantly
changed the federal-state balance in the prosecution of crimes. Bass,
404 U. S., at 349. To read § 844(i) as encompassing the arson of an
owner-occupied private home would effect such a change, for arson is a
paradigmatic common-law state crime. Pp. 857–858.

178 F. 3d 479, reversed and remanded.

Ginsburg, J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Stevens,
J., ﬁled a concurring opinion, in which Thomas, J., joined, post, p. 859.
Thomas, J., ﬁled a concurring opinion, in which Scalia, J., joined, post,
p. 860.

Donald M. Falk argued the cause and ﬁled briefs for

petitioner.

Deputy Solicitor General Dreeben argued the cause for
the United States. With him on the brief were Solicitor
General Waxman, Assistant Attorney General Robinson,
Malcolm L. Stewart, and David S. Kris.*

Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court.
It is a federal crime under 18 U. S. C. § 844(i) (1994 ed.,
Supp. IV) to damage or destroy, “by means of ﬁre or an ex-
plosive, any . . . property used in interstate or foreign com-
merce or in any activity affecting interstate or foreign com-
merce.” This case presents the question whether arson of
an owner-occupied private residence falls within § 844(i)’s
compass. Construing the statute’s text, we hold that an
owner-occupied residence not used for any commercial pur-
pose does not qualify as property “used in” commerce or

*Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were ﬁled for the Cato Institute
by Ronald D. Rotunda; for the Center for the Original Intent of the Con-
stitution by Michael P. Farris; for the National Association of Criminal
Defense Lawyers et al. by Jeffrey J. Pokorak and Barbara Bergman; for
the Paciﬁc Legal Foundation by Anne M. Hayes and M. Reed Hopper; and
for Dale Lynn Ryan by John G. Roberts, Jr., and Gregory G. Garre.