Judges Can Weigh New Factors in Crack Cases, Justices Say

[Polybius]

Source: Bloomberg Law

Judges can consider new circumstances when resentencing criminal defendants punished when penalties for crack-cocaine were harsher, the US Supreme Court ruled.

In a 5-4 decision on Monday on a question the petitioner said affects thousands of people eligible for resentencing, the justices said the First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence.

In an unusual line-up, conservatives Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch joined the court’s liberal wing in the majority opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomajor.

The appeal was brought by Carlos Concepcion, who pleaded guilty to crack-cocaine charges and was sentenced to 19 years in federal prison in 2009. That was a year before the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act, which narrowed the disparity between crack- and powder-cocaine penalties. The 2018 First Step Act made the 2010 act’s changes retroactive.

Read more: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/judges-can-weigh-new-circumstances-in-crack-cases-justices-say

---

Odd that Thomas sided with the liberals on this.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

1. Finally a decent decision (nt)

[peppertree]

2. Thomass was probably dozing off when he cast his vote

It's well known that Justice Pubic Hair seldom actually pays attention to proceedings - and merely waits for his fellow medievalists to decide.

Getting on as he is, he was no doubt half asleep by the end.

[speak easy]

3. 'Thomass was probably dozing off when he cast his vote'

until he did a line

[peppertree]

5. Right. I forgot how much he loves his Coke.

[JudyM]

4. Makes you wonder how it benefits him/his handlers.

[Baitball Blogger]

6. It's not odd that Thomas sided with the liberals.

He's very transparent. He took a pass on Loving too. Not only would that have affected family members and people he might know, like himself, it is also an issue that would have alienated, not just black and white marriages, but if Loving is based on race, it would have also alienated Asian and white marriages. In the culture wars, that's a bridge too far if they still want any kind of support at all.

Thomas is more a political strategist than an objective justice. Or, he is influenced by political strategists.

[Polybius]

9. By taking a pass, do you mean that he spoke about it?

Because he didn't vote on that case, it was way before his time on the Court.

[Baitball Blogger]

10. I mean, he gave us a prelude to the future cases that would be revisted by the Court,

the cases that determine privacy, like abortion: gay rights and contraception -- he mentioned all but Loving. Loving, which involved interracial marriage. Can you think of one reason why he would give Loving a pass?

[RandySF]

7. Gorsuch occasionally veers left.

Not that it makes him any good.

[Cheezoholic]

8. Thaks for the bone SCOTUS

Right up there with paper towel tossing in a hurricane devastated Puerto Rico. All these fascists are the same.