Will SCOTUS overturn or narrow Stinson deference to federal sentencing-guideline commentary?

10.0 pts (24h)US PoliticsOne-Off2a

KalshiVérifier la disponibilitéKYC requis2% de fraisDonnées de résolution vérifiéesGrossièrement calibré

Probabilité implicite actuelle

Oui 70%+10.0pt

Qualite du marche

44 / 100

Faible qualité

Volume 24h

48,4 €

Liquidité

472,4 €

Faible liquidité

Achat / Vente

65.0% / 71.0%

Spread

6.0 pt

Spread large

Données du marché

Mis à jour il y a 17 minutes

24 juil. 26, 0:001 août 28, 14:00

Tendances

Résultat24hProbabilité

Fonds fictifs uniquement, aucun argent réelCeci n'est pas un conseil financier

Résultat choisi

Yes70%

Mise (USDT)

Règles

If the Supreme Court, in Beaird v.

United States, rules courts must independently interpret the Sentencing Guidelines or apply a narrower deference framework than Stinson when considering Guidelines commentary, then the market resolves to Yes.
The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled, in Beaird v.
United States, that Stinson v.
United States no longer correctly states the rule governing the deference courts must give commentary to the Sentencing Guidelines, including by requiring courts to exercise independent judgment or apply a materially narrower deference framework than Stinson’s rule that such commentary is authoritative unless it violates the Constitution or a federal statute, is inconsistent with the guideline, or is a plainly erroneous reading of the guideline, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028.
The market resolves to No if the Court holds that Stinson still correctly states the governing rule.

Tendance du volume

$55

24 juil.4j de données27 juil.

Marchés Associés

Will SCOTUS require 12-person juries for serious felonies?

4,4 €

Oui: 79%

KALSHI

Will the Supreme Court bar Boulder’s state-law climate claims against Suncor and Exxon?

0 €

Oui: 71%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS reject narrow Free Exercise tests for Catholic preschools?

0 €

Oui: 84%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS allow Arizona’s citizenship-proof and pre-election noncitizen-removal rules?

0 €

Oui: 61%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar contempt for conduct not clearly prohibited by an injunction?

0 €

Oui: 0%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar unpled affirmative defenses at summary judgment?

0 €

Oui: 66%

KALSHI

Actifs dans ces sujets

BitcoinBTC$63,399.27-3.25%

EthereumETH$1,881.18-4.40%

SolanaSOL$73.16-4.64%

DogecoinDOGE$0.0699-4.48%

XRPXRP$1.06-4.92%

BNBBNB$564.84-1.94%

Actualités Associées

Polymarket: Vance leads 2028 at 19.85% as pricing trend softensBlockchain.News

White House pushes Senate Democrats to take 'historic' crypto Clarity Act ethics dealCoindesk

Senate nears bipartisan CLARITY Act deal after ethics breakthroughCrypto News

White House agrees to ethics provisions in market structure billCointelegraph

Polymarket odds show Vance at 19.85% as Epstein files critique hits tapeBlockchain.News

Dick Durbin accuses Todd Blanche of shielding Trump’s crypto empireCrypto News

Règles

If the Supreme Court, in Beaird v.

United States, rules courts must independently interpret the Sentencing Guidelines or apply a narrower deference framework than Stinson when considering Guidelines commentary, then the market resolves to Yes.
The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled, in Beaird v.
United States, that Stinson v.
United States no longer correctly states the rule governing the deference courts must give commentary to the Sentencing Guidelines, including by requiring courts to exercise independent judgment or apply a materially narrower deference framework than Stinson’s rule that such commentary is authoritative unless it violates the Constitution or a federal statute, is inconsistent with the guideline, or is a plainly erroneous reading of the guideline, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028.
The market resolves to No if the Court holds that Stinson still correctly states the governing rule.

Will SCOTUS overturn or narrow Stinson deference to federal sentencing-guideline commentary?

10.0 pts (24h)US PoliticsOne-Off2a

KalshiVérifier la disponibilitéKYC requis2% de fraisDonnées de résolution vérifiéesGrossièrement calibré

Probabilité implicite actuelle

Oui 70%+10.0pt

Qualite du marche

44 / 100

Faible qualité

Volume 24h

48,4 €

Liquidité

472,4 €

Faible liquidité

Achat / Vente

65.0% / 71.0%

Spread

6.0 pt

Spread large

Données du marché

Mis à jour il y a 17 minutes

24 juil. 26, 0:001 août 28, 14:00

Tendances

Résultat24hProbabilité

Fonds fictifs uniquement, aucun argent réelCeci n'est pas un conseil financier

Résultat choisi

Yes70%

Mise (USDT)

Règles

If the Supreme Court, in Beaird v.

United States, rules courts must independently interpret the Sentencing Guidelines or apply a narrower deference framework than Stinson when considering Guidelines commentary, then the market resolves to Yes.
The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled, in Beaird v.
United States, that Stinson v.
United States no longer correctly states the rule governing the deference courts must give commentary to the Sentencing Guidelines, including by requiring courts to exercise independent judgment or apply a materially narrower deference framework than Stinson’s rule that such commentary is authoritative unless it violates the Constitution or a federal statute, is inconsistent with the guideline, or is a plainly erroneous reading of the guideline, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028.
The market resolves to No if the Court holds that Stinson still correctly states the governing rule.

Tendance du volume

$55

24 juil.4j de données27 juil.

Marchés Associés

Will SCOTUS require 12-person juries for serious felonies?

4,4 €

Oui: 79%

KALSHI

Will the Supreme Court bar Boulder’s state-law climate claims against Suncor and Exxon?

0 €

Oui: 71%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS reject narrow Free Exercise tests for Catholic preschools?

0 €

Oui: 84%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS allow Arizona’s citizenship-proof and pre-election noncitizen-removal rules?

0 €

Oui: 61%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar contempt for conduct not clearly prohibited by an injunction?

0 €

Oui: 0%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar unpled affirmative defenses at summary judgment?

0 €

Oui: 66%

KALSHI

Actifs dans ces sujets

BitcoinBTC$63,399.27-3.25%

EthereumETH$1,881.18-4.40%

SolanaSOL$73.16-4.64%

DogecoinDOGE$0.0699-4.48%

XRPXRP$1.06-4.92%

BNBBNB$564.84-1.94%

Actualités Associées

Polymarket: Vance leads 2028 at 19.85% as pricing trend softensBlockchain.News

White House pushes Senate Democrats to take 'historic' crypto Clarity Act ethics dealCoindesk

Senate nears bipartisan CLARITY Act deal after ethics breakthroughCrypto News

White House agrees to ethics provisions in market structure billCointelegraph

Polymarket odds show Vance at 19.85% as Epstein files critique hits tapeBlockchain.News

Dick Durbin accuses Todd Blanche of shielding Trump’s crypto empireCrypto News

Règles

If the Supreme Court, in Beaird v.

United States, rules courts must independently interpret the Sentencing Guidelines or apply a narrower deference framework than Stinson when considering Guidelines commentary, then the market resolves to Yes.
The Payout Criterion for the Contract encompasses the Expiration Values that the Supreme Court of the United States has ruled, in Beaird v.
United States, that Stinson v.
United States no longer correctly states the rule governing the deference courts must give commentary to the Sentencing Guidelines, including by requiring courts to exercise independent judgment or apply a materially narrower deference framework than Stinson’s rule that such commentary is authoritative unless it violates the Constitution or a federal statute, is inconsistent with the guideline, or is a plainly erroneous reading of the guideline, after Issuance and before August 1, 2028.
The market resolves to No if the Court holds that Stinson still correctly states the governing rule.