We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.
SENTENCING COMMISSION DREAMS BIG, DISAPPOINTS THOSE WHO WOULD JUST LIKE A LITTLE PROGRESS
The US Sentencing Commission adopted its priorities for the coming 2027 Amendment cycle last week, plans that can be summed up as “We’re gonna do some stuff.”
What’s missing are concrete proposals to reconsider guidelines on meth purity, sex offense, or felon-in-possession, to name a few.
The Commission said it intends to “undertake an evaluation of the guidelines and federal sentencing practices in light of the Commission’s mission set forth in the Sentencing Reform Act, the statutory purposes of sentencing in 18 USC 3553(a)(2), and relevant legal developments that have occurred in the past four decades.”
The Commission also expects to undertake a comprehensive review of its Rules of Procedure and consider whether any amendments to such Rules may be appropriate to further the agency’s statutory purposes and enhance public engagement with and understanding of the Commission’s work. As part of the priority, the Commission expects to review current practices and consider possible changes regarding: (a) what Commission work is conducted in public; (b) what Commission policymaking materials should be made public; (c) how stakeholder and public involvement is structured, including through rules about ex parte communications; and (d) what analyses supporting agency policymaking are conducted and released publicly.”
Having the USSC start doing more than walking into its meeting room, holding a couple of unanimous votes on guideline changes, and calling it a wrap, all in 20 minutes, would be a good idea. Likewise, when an idea – such as changing the meth purity guidelines – dies, a public funeral where the reasons for the rejection are explained would benefit those of use the Commission likes to call its “stakeholders.”
Writing in Sentencing Matters substack, University of Minnesota law professor Sam Merchant said,
The Commission is exploring at least six substantive changes covering aspects like who sits at the table, adding as nonvoting seats a member of the Criminal Law Committee of the Judicial Conference and a representative of the Federal Public Defenders, making it harder to make amendments retroactive, disclosing Commissioners’ ex parte communications, increasing public participation in agenda-setting, and publicly disclosing meeting materials and nonpublic minutes… If adopted in full, the Commission could operate more transparently, add more voices and broaden participation at meetings and hearings, and could need five votes, rather than four, to apply an amendment retroactively.
USSC, Final Priorities for Amendment Cycle (Aug 27, 2026)
Sentencing Matters substack, Summaries: The U.S. Sentencing Commission’s Final 2026-27 Policy Priorities, Proposed Changes to Rules of Practice and Procedure, and Drone Amendment (August 31, 2026)
~ Thomas L. Root