SUPREME COURT ≠ COMPASSIONATE RELEASE
Supreme Court ‘Compassionate Release’ Ruling Could Send Ex-Inmates Back Behind Bars
- At 61, Bailey is facing a possible return to prison after a Supreme Court ruling and Justice Department action. “I hope everything turns out and I get my life back,” he said. “I’m a better person now — a productive citizen.”
The that federal judges cannot consider extreme sentence disparities or outdated laws when deciding on compassionate release, which allows for shortened prison terms under “extraordinary and compelling reasons.” This decision undermines efforts to reform federal sentencing fairness. Although the compassionate release statute, enacted in the 1980s, originally permitted only prison wardens to file motions, the First Step Act of 2018 authorized incarcerated individuals to file such motions.
- While the COVID-19 pandemic saw increased use of this statute, fewer than 17% of motions were granted from 2020 to 2022. Courts have been divided on whether changes to nonretroactive sentencing law could qualify as “extraordinary and compelling reasons” for a reduction.
- The Sentencing Commission issued a policy statement in November 2023 that aimed to clarify these grounds, but federal prosecutors contested its legality. The cases of Daniel Rutherford and Johnnie Markel Carter, who faced disproportionate sentences under outdated laws, reached the Supreme Court, which ultimately affirmed the strict limitations on compassionate release.
- A legal debate arose regarding whether nonretroactive sentencing reforms, which would yield shorter sentences today, could qualify as “extraordinary and compelling reasons.” The Sentencing Commission introduced a policy statement addressing this issue, but federal prosecutors contested its legality.
Then there is:
AND,
L
L