Peithman v. United States

The justices are being asked whether a federal forfeiture law lets the government make one member of a conspiracy pay back the full proceeds obtained by the group. The fight is over whether that joint-and-several approach is allowed under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C) or blocked by the Court's Honeycutt decision.

Oral argument has not been scheduled yet. The dispute is whether § 981(a)(1)(C) permits joint-and-several forfeiture among co-conspirators or whether Honeycutt forecloses it.

The answer could change how much money defendants in conspiracy cases can be ordered to forfeit. For example, a smaller player in a group scheme could face liability for proceeds another conspirator received.

Watch for oral argument or another scheduling move from the Court. No decision window is available yet.

The case asks whether one conspirator can owe forfeiture for all group proceeds under 18 U.S.C. § 981(a)(1)(C). It also asks whether Honeycutt blocks that joint-and-several approach.

People convicted in conspiracy cases could face forfeiture based on money received by co-conspirators, not just money they personally obtained.

The next sign of movement is an oral-argument date or another scheduling order from the Court. No decision timeline is available yet.