Supreme Court says certain gun crimes are not 'crimes of violence' under federal law

[Igel]

10. Read the act again.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1951

Note that I haven't read the opinion. Also no JD. But literate, most days.

... “robbery” means the unlawful taking or obtaining of personal property ...

...The term “extortion” means the obtaining of property from another ...

The plaintiff was accused of "attempted" something-or-other.

If I take your personal property unlawfully or obtain it through (coerced) consent, it's not attempted. It's done. Text doesn't say "attempted ... taking" or "obtained obtaining" (note to self: is "obtention" a word?)

If I use "actual or threatened force, or violence, or fear of injury, immediate or future, to his person or property, or property in his custody or possession, or the person or property of a relative or member of his family or of anyone in his company ..." but don't actually take the property, it's not obtaining. BTW, that ellipsis removed "at the time of the taking or obtaining". If there was no taking or obtaining, that provision doesn't apply. But since "that provision" is the entire Act....

Narrow construal. All that's needed is for the plain meaning of the text to be what you work off of; working off of "intent" when the plain text is clear seems strained.

I'd have voted to acquit on this charge (at least) had I been provided the text of the law, the charge, and been seated as a juror.