Congress, Justice Dept. Move to Bolster Sentences January 18, 2005
News Summary
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that current federal sentencing guidelines are advisory, not mandatory, both Congress and the U.S. Justice Department moved to prevent power over sentencing from returning to judges, the Wall Street Journal reported Jan. 14.Some lawmakers, like Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), called on Congress to avoid quick fixes, but Justice Department officials and their allies on Capitol Hill were already meeting to discuss mandatory-sentencing legislation that could pass constitutional muster. Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, is a big backer of mandatory minimum sentences, and wants to limit judicial discretion on sentencing. But Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is less supportive.
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist has gone on record in recent years calling for better relations between the courts and lawmakers, but also has explicitly warned against efforts to punish judges who stray from sentencing guidelines.
Meanwhile, judges nationally worked to digest the new guidance from the Supreme Court. In the wake of a high-court ruling on very similar guidelines in the state of Washington, most judges were already treating the federal guidelines as if they were unconstitutional. However, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals had declared the federal guidelines constitutional and ordered judges to continue following them. In a number of cases, judges said they would still strongly rely on the guidelines, even if they were advisory in nature.
"I'm only going to deviate where there's significant reason to do so," said Judge Paul G. Cassell, a federal jurist in Salt Lake City.
Boston University School of Public Health 
COMMENTS ON THIS ARTICLE: