While the Fifth Amendment protects against double jeopardy, Terance Gamble has received two sentences and two convictions for the same crime–once under Alabama law and once under federal law due to the doctrine of dual sovereignty.

This jurisprudence comes from the Supreme Court decision in Abbate v. United States (1959), which declared that as separate sovereigns, the states and the federal government may prosecute an individual for the same crime.

Should the Court overrule the separate sovereigns exception to the double jeopardy clause? Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute explores the interaction between the double jeopardy clause and state sovereignty in Gamble v. United States. Oral argument is December 5, 2018.

As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speaker.

Learn more about Ilya Shapiro:

Follow Ilya Shapiro on Twitter @ishapiro


Differing Views:

The Yale Law Journal: “Dual Sovereignty, Due Process, and Duplicative Punishment: A New Solution to an Old Problem”

Cato Institute: “Gamble v. United States

National Conference of State Legislatures: “State Authority Under Double Jeopardy Clause on Line in SCOTUS Case”

Case Western Reserve Law Review: “Dual Sovereignty and Double Jeopardy: A Critique of Bartkus v. Illinois and Abbate v. United States

Washington University Law Review: “Accepting the Dual Sovereignty Exception to Double Jeopardy: A Hard Case Study”