We will hear argument first this morning in case 237483 Estaris v. United States.

Mr. Grostick.

Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court, in Section 3583E, Congress listed factors

that courts must consider when terminating, modifying, or revoking supervised release,

and omitted the factors that it intended to preclude.

Most important here is Section 3553A2A's retribution factors.

3553A expressly states that A2's four subsections are the purposes of sentencing,

which courts must satisfy when imposing prison a fine or probation.

Courts have wide discretion about what to consider and how to fulfill those purposes,

but they do not have discretion about what purposes to satisfy.

In 3583E, Congress was surgical and removed one of those purposes, retributive punishment under A2A.

That was different from every other sentencing option, including the otherwise identical language in the probation statute.

Congress thereby precluded courts from considering A2A's retributive purposes in the supervised release context,

as this court recognized in Tapia regarding the identical list in subsection C.

And the Senate report confirms what we see in the text.

Under subsection C, courts, quote, may not, or supervised release, quote, may not be imposed for purposes of punishment.

And the identical list in subsection E has the same meaning.

That also fits with the history of the statute.

When Congress abolished parole, it created supervised release to fulfill the

rehabilitative purposes following a prison sentence that satisfies A2A.

Congress gave courts tools to adjust supervision, such as extending or modifying, but only for

the limited purposes listed in 3583E. Congress did not add A2A to that list in later amendments, when it added the revocation tool and when it added

...