Supreme Court Oral Arguments [24-482] Ellingburg v. United States
Ellingburg v. United States
Argued on Oct 14, 2025.
Petitioner: Holsey Ellingburg, Jr.
Respondent: United States of America.
Advocates:
- Amy M. Saharia (for the Petitioner)
- Ashley Robertson (for the Respondent, supporting vacatur)
- John F. Bash (Court-appointed amicus curiae, supporting the judgment below)
Facts of the case (from oyez.org)
In December 1995, Holsey Ellingburg, Jr. robbed a bank and was indicted in April 1996. He was convicted in August 1996 and sentenced to prison, along with an order to pay over $7,500 in restitution under the Victim and Witness Protection Act (VWPA). Following his release from prison in June 2022, having paid only about one-quarter of the original restitution amount, Mr. Ellingburg filed a motion arguing that enforcement of his restitution order was unlawful. He claimed that the applicable 20-year payment period under the VWPA had expired and that applying a longer restitution term and mandatory interest provision under the later-enacted Mandatory Victim Restitution Act (MVRA) violated the Ex Post Facto Clause.
The district court rejected Mr. Ellingburg’s arguments and upheld the restitution order. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision.
Question
Is criminal restitution under the Mandatory Victim Restitution Act (MVRA) penal for purposes of the Ex Post Facto Clause?