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

10.0 pts (24h)US PoliticsOne-Off2a

KalshiVerificar disponibilidadeKYC obrigatório2% de taxaDados de resolução verificadosCalibração aproximada

Probabilidade implícita atual

Sim 70%+10.0pt

Qualidade do mercado

44 / 100

Baixa qualidade

Volume 24h

48,4 €

Liquidez

472,4 €

Baixa liquidez

Compra / Venda

65.0% / 71.0%

Spread

6.0 pt

Spread amplo

Dados do mercado

Atualizado há 20 minutos

24/07/26, 0:001/08/28, 14:00

Tendências

Resultado24hProbabilidade

Apenas fundos simulados, sem dinheiro realIsto não é aconselhamento financeiro

Resultado escolhido

Yes70%

Aposta (USDT)

Regras

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.

Tendência de volume

$55

24 de jul.4d de dados27 de jul.

Mercados Relacionados

Will SCOTUS require 12-person juries for serious felonies?

4,4 €

Sim: 79%

KALSHI

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

0 €

Sim: 71%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS reject narrow Free Exercise tests for Catholic preschools?

0 €

Sim: 84%

KALSHI

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

0 €

Sim: 61%

KALSHI

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

0 €

Sim: 0%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar unpled affirmative defenses at summary judgment?

0 €

Sim: 66%

KALSHI

Ativos nestes tópicos

BitcoinBTC$63,393.49-3.26%

EthereumETH$1,880.04-4.45%

SolanaSOL$73.17-4.63%

DogecoinDOGE$0.0699-4.49%

XRPXRP$1.06-4.90%

BNBBNB$565.04-1.91%

Notícias Relacionadas

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

Regras

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

KalshiVerificar disponibilidadeKYC obrigatório2% de taxaDados de resolução verificadosCalibração aproximada

Probabilidade implícita atual

Sim 70%+10.0pt

Qualidade do mercado

44 / 100

Baixa qualidade

Volume 24h

48,4 €

Liquidez

472,4 €

Baixa liquidez

Compra / Venda

65.0% / 71.0%

Spread

6.0 pt

Spread amplo

Dados do mercado

Atualizado há 20 minutos

24/07/26, 0:001/08/28, 14:00

Tendências

Resultado24hProbabilidade

Apenas fundos simulados, sem dinheiro realIsto não é aconselhamento financeiro

Resultado escolhido

Yes70%

Aposta (USDT)

Regras

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.

Tendência de volume

$55

24 de jul.4d de dados27 de jul.

Mercados Relacionados

Will SCOTUS require 12-person juries for serious felonies?

4,4 €

Sim: 79%

KALSHI

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

0 €

Sim: 71%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS reject narrow Free Exercise tests for Catholic preschools?

0 €

Sim: 84%

KALSHI

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

0 €

Sim: 61%

KALSHI

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

0 €

Sim: 0%

KALSHI

Will SCOTUS bar unpled affirmative defenses at summary judgment?

0 €

Sim: 66%

KALSHI

Ativos nestes tópicos

BitcoinBTC$63,393.49-3.26%

EthereumETH$1,880.04-4.45%

SolanaSOL$73.17-4.63%

DogecoinDOGE$0.0699-4.49%

XRPXRP$1.06-4.90%

BNBBNB$565.04-1.91%

Notícias Relacionadas

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

Regras

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.