Supreme Court Rules Sentencing Disparities Cannot Justify Early Release for Pre-First Step Act Prisoners
Whenever Congress changes the laws and regulations around what kind of sentences should be handed down in criminal cases, inevitably some of the first questions many inmates already serving a sentence ask is simple: does this change apply to my case and/or can I get relief under the new rules? Often the key to this is whether or not a change was meant to be retroactive, meaning Congress expressly conveyed the desire for it to be a source of relief for previously sentenced individuals (which unfortunately is usually the case). Still, inmates in the federal system sentenced to lengthy prison sentences can ask for relief by filing a petition for “Compassionate Release” which has several criteria for early release, including a seemingly somewhat catch-all provision of “extraordinary and compelling circumstances” that has been elusive for Courts to define in the wake of its passing. One source of confusion was what relief was available for inmates that had previously received lengthy prison sentences under §924(c)’s notorious “stacking” provision. Congress effectively eliminated the provision in the First Step Act of 2018 for certain first-time offenders, including two inmates who recently challenged their sentences at the Supreme Court given that they would not been subject to such lengthy mandatory sentences had they been sentenced today under the new sentencing guidelines. Daniel Rutherford and Johnnie Carter both committed multiple armed robberies (in unrelated cases) where no one was ever injured and both received stacking sentences that subjected them to length minimum sentences, receiving, respectively, sentences of over 42 years for Rutherford (with a 32-year minimum thank to stacking provision instead of the current 14-year minimum he would face today) and 70 years imprisonment for Carter (who faced a 57-year minimum rather than the current 21-year minimum sentence). Faced with these disparities, they asked the Courts to review their appeals for Compassionate Release, arguing that the fact that they would have received a much shorter sentence if they were sentenced today should entitle an inmate to eligibility for early release. Unfortunately for both men and thousands of federal prisoners sentenced under laws that Congress has since softened, the definitive answer is a resounding “no” according to the Supreme Courts most recent ruling.
Writing for the majority in Rutherford v. United States, Justice Amy Coney Barrett held that when Congress declines to make a sentencing change retroactive, the resulting disparity between old and new sentences is not an “extraordinary and compelling reason” that warrants a sentence reduction under the federal compassionate release statute because the First Step Act was not retroactive and such lack of retroactivity is neither “extraordinary” nor “compelling” since such changes, “usually benefit only future offenders.” “When Congress declines to make a sentencing amendment retroactive — as with the change to §924(c) — the resulting sentencing disparity cannot serve as an ‘extraordinary and compelling’ reason that warrants a sentence reduction.”
What Does This Mean if I Want Compassionate Release?
Simply put, this ruling means that thousands of federal prisoners sentenced before 2018 under §924(c)’s stacking rules remain ineligible for the First Step Act’s reduced mandatory minimums by statute and district courts are not able to reduce their sentence under Compassionate Release because they do not qualify under the “extraordinary and compelling circumstances.” Prisoners serving lengthy sentences under other pre-reform laws, mandatory minimums for drug offenses not listed in the First Step Act, for example, who had hoped that compassionate release could bridge the gap between old and new sentencing norms now face a categorical bar on using sentencing disparity as a ground for release. Worse still for inmates, the ruling makes clear that it invalidated recent the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s 2023 policy statement that had added “Unusually Long Sentence” as a recognized ground for compassionate release, eliminating a tool many clients had been relying on. While Compassionate Release remains a viable option for some inmates, prisoners and their attorneys must now demonstrate “extraordinary and compelling” reasons rooted in other articulable circumstances in order to receive relief.
