The Department of Justice often supports judicial discretion when it leads to harsher sentences but resists it when it results in more lenient outcomes. This tension came to a head with compassionate release (CR) motions under 18 USC § 3582(c)(1)(A). These motions allow prisoners to seek reduced sentences for extraordinary and compelling reasons, including legal changes.

A new guideline, 1B1.13(b)(5), permits CR for legal changes, but the government argues this exceeds the Commission’s authority. In the case of Joel Jean, sentenced to 292 months in 2009 for drug and firearm offenses, new rulings meant he would not be classified as a career offender today. The district court reduced his sentence to time served, citing his rehabilitation and changes in law. The government appealed, but the 5th Circuit upheld the reduction, affirming judicial discretion to consider legal changes alongside rehabilitation for CR.

—

DOJ’s Recidivism Double Standard

The DOJ often highlights the risk of recidivism in opposing compassionate release (CR) motions, despite the PATTERN system’s risk ratings. Inmates with “low” or “minimum” PATTERN ratings reoffend at significantly lower rates (2.8% and 5.6% respectively), yet the government argues against their release, claiming public danger.

The DOJ’s First Step Act Annual Report shows that longer sentences do not significantly curb recidivism, challenging the notion that extended incarceration enhances public safety.

—

9th Circuit Reconsiders Gun Possession Ban

In May, a 9th Circuit panel found the 18 USC 922(g)(1) ban on felons possessing guns unconstitutional. However, the case has been set for en banc review. Judge Lawrence VanDyke criticized the court’s repeated en banc reviews of 2nd Amendment cases, suggesting a bias against upholding gun rights.

Simultaneously, the 8th Circuit struck down a Minnesota law preventing 18-to-20-year-olds from carrying handguns, emphasizing that legislative beliefs alone cannot override constitutional rights.