Christopher L. Carroll and Whiskey Dix Big Truck Repair, LLC v. United States

The Fifth Amendment guarantees that no person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury. That guarantee carries constitutional substance and “cannot mean less today than [it] did the day [it was] adopted.” United States v. Haymond, 588 U.S. 634, 642 (2019). Circa 1791, Justices traveling circuit, contemporary legal scholars, popular legal publications and courts throughout the new republic were all rejecting probable as the appropriate grand jury standard of proof and articulating a much higher standard. These contemporaneous authorities establish that the standard required for a grand jury indictment was substantially higher than probable cause when the Fifth Amendment was adopted. T h is Cou r t ha s never d i rect ly resolved t he constitutionally required standard for the grand jury. Rather than applying the historical record, the Eighth Circuit declared itself bound by dicta in later decisions of this Court and held that a grand jury may indict upon a mere finding of probable cause. That holding contravenes the original public understanding of the Grand Jury Clause and weakens a foundational constitutional protection. Petitioners’ case presents the question as a pure legal issue, properly preserved and clearly presented for this Court’s review. The Question Presented is: 1. Whether the Eighth Circuit erred in holding that the Fifth Amendment permits a grand jury to indict on a finding of probable cause—contravening the original public understanding of the Grand Jury Clause.