Both the Government and the Ninth Circuit had identified statements of members of Congress that suggested, in their opinion, Congress's intent to make "serious bodily injury" a sentencing factor. The Court was not persuaded, for some members had used the phrase "penalty enhancement", which the Court did not take to mean precisely the same thing as "sentencing factor". The fact that other members had referred to the "crime" of carjacking, as opposed to the "crimes" of carjacking, also had little significance for the Court. Ultimately, there was no reason to believe that in this case Congress had abandoned any of the models it had previously employed.