As you know, last September the BOP changed its email system to make mass emailing of this newsletter impossible.
This is a copy of the newsletter for May 19, 2025. I have reformatted it to eliminate graphics so everything printed in black will fit into a Corrlinks email (if you are providing it to an inmate).
LISA Newsletter for May 19, 2025 – “Good Enough” on 922(g)(1) Becoming the Enemy of 2nd Amendment Perfection
LISA publishes a free newsletter sent to inmate subscribers in the Federal system. Due to BOP Corrlinks limitations, the newsletter must be sent in small batches throughout the week.
Edited by Thomas L Root, MA JD
Vol 11, No 20
<><>
DOJ Trying to Avoid Supreme Court 922(g)(1) Challenge?
Alice is Back… and a ‘Substantial Batch” of Clemency Grants May Be Coming
Bill Introduced To Speed BOP Correctional Officer Hiring
Sentence Reduction Odds Aren’t Great, USSC Data Show
<><>
DOJ TRYING TO AVOID SUPREME COURT 922(G)(1) CHALLENGE?
Voltaire wrote (roughly translated) that perfection is the enemy of good enough. Disturbing evidence is emerging that President Trump’s administration is adopting that standard in fighting to keep 18 USC 922(g)(1) – the felon-in-possession ban that is the most enforced gun law on the federal books – in place.
Several DOJ Supreme Court filings last month urged SCOTUS to reject review of F-I-P cases asking whether 922(g)(1) can be applied to nonviolent felons consistent with NY State Rifle & Postal Assn v Bruen, arguing in part that the DOJ’s yet-unformed proposal to use 18 USC 925(c) to restore gun rights for some felons is good enough.
In March, DOJ ginned up an ad hoc rights restoration program to reward actor and Trump supporter Mel Gibson by giving him back his gun rights despite a domestic violence conviction. Opposition to the decision cost Pardon Attorney Elizabeth Oyer her job. Ultimately, the agency restored the gun rights of 10 people (including Gibson), noting cryptically that each person had submitted “materials… seeking either a pardon or relief from federal firearms disabilities, and it is established to [the Attorney General’s] satisfaction that each individual will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that the granting of the relief to each individual would not be contrary to the public interest.”
DOJ has neither issued any regulations on how former felons might apply for gun rights restoration nor has it responded to multiple requests for details. But that has not stopped DOJ from citing this undisclosed process as an additional reason for the Supreme Court not to grant any felon-in-possession cases.
On Apr 25, Solicitor General John Sauer opposed a petition for cert from a 4th Circuit 922(g)(1) as-applied denial. “Although there is some disagreement among the courts of appeals regarding whether Sec 922(g)(1) is susceptible to individualized as-applied challenges, that disagreement is shallow,” SG Sauer wrote, “[a]nd any disagreement among the circuits may evaporate given the Dept of Justice’s recent reestablishment of the administrative process under 18 USC 925(c) for granting relief from federal firearms disabilities.”
The Reload, a gun law newsletter, said, “The Trump Administration’s preferred approach to gun rights for convicted felons [is] one that would grant a high degree of discretion and centralize the decision-making within the executive branch rather than through a widely applicable legal precedent, as gun-rights advocates have long sought in court. As a result, it may undermine many of the movement’s best cases by undercutting the claims of sympathetic plaintiffs.”
The Government seems to be deliberately avoiding picking a Supreme Court 922(g)(1) fight it doesn’t think it can win. I reported previously that DOJ decided against filing for cert after losing a 3rd Circuit en banc decision on 922(g)(1)’s constitutionality. In a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Solicitor General said, “In the case of Bryan Range, a Pennsylvania man with a 30-year-old state misdemeanor conviction for understating his income on a food stamp application, the Third Circuit ruled the ban violated his Second Amendment rights… The Department of Justice has concluded that a petition for a writ of certiorari is not warranted in this case,” Solicitor General John Sauer wrote a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee last month. “The Third Circuit’s decision is narrow, leaving Sec 922(g)(1) untouched except in the most unusual applications.”
Two weeks ago, the 9th Circuit in US v Duarte joined the 4th, 8th, 10th and 11th Circuits in refusing to distinguish between violent and non-violent criminals for the purposes of F-I-P constitutionality. The Reload said, “Assuming Duarte appeals the decision, which seems likely, it could present a compelling opportunity for the High Court to address the now deepened circuit split with the 3rd, 5th, and 6th Circuits, which have all recognized an ability for individualized challenges to the federal ban by non-violent offenders.”
Last week, a cert petition filed in Vincent v Bondi may derail the DOJ’s efforts to avoid a Supreme Court reckoning on F-I-P. Vincent is the poster child for an as-applied challenge to 922(g)(1), a woman who was convicted 17 years ago of felony bank fraud for passing a fraudulent $498 check when she was homeless and an addict. She got no jail time. Since then, she rehabbed, became a mom, earned several master’s degrees, and started her own rehab counseling firm. Nevertheless, 922(g)(1) permanently keeps her from possessing a gun to protect her family.
The Reload said that SCOTUS may find ruling on F-I-P easier “by accepting a case like Vincent’s, where even most hardline gun-control advocates would have a difficult time arguing she is too dangerous for consideration.”
DOJ may oppose Vincent by arguing that its new 925(c) gun rights restoration procedure, whatever it may be, is good enough to take care of her wish to possess a gun. But if 922(g)(1) violates the 2nd Amendment as applied to Vincent, then some amorphous and opaque DOJ procedure to restore gun rights on the whim of the AG hardly cures the violation. What’s more, it means that some, if not many, of the tens of thousands of federal prisoners doing time for a potentially unconstitutional offense will be left out in the cold.
The “good enough” of a 925(c) rights restoration will not be a sufficient substitute for the “perfection” of a Supreme Court ruling on 922(g)(1).
Opposition to Petition for Certiorari, Hunt v US, Case No 24-6818 (filed Apr 25)
The Reload, The Coming DOJ-SCOTUS Showdown Over Felon Gun Rights (May 18)
Solicitor General Letter to Sen Richard Durbin (Apr 11, 2025)
Petition for Certiorari, Vincent v US, Case No 24-1155 (filed May 12)
<><>
ALICE IS BACK… AND A ‘SUBSTANTIAL BATCH” OF CLEMENCY GRANTS MAY BE COMING
After President Trump appointed former federal inmate Alice Marie Johnson to be his “pardon czar” last February, she seemed to disappear. No one even knew whether she’d have a White House office as opposed to mere corresponding privileges with Trump.
Last week, we learned a little about what she is doing and got a hint that a clemency release is looming. In a Fox News interview with Lara Trump, Johnson said that she “sent over 100 clemency and pardon petitions to the White House” and “46 people really were able to get a second chance in life…”
Johnson suggested that her criteria included people “who deserve this second chance who are similarly situated, not just like me, but who have served enough time, who have paid their debt to society, plus there are those who have been, I’m going to say, the victims of lawfare the same way our President was.”
“Lawfare” as commonly used refers to an attempt to damage or delegitimize an opponent, or to deter an individual’s usage of his or her legal rights. President Trump has said that his indictments for Jan 6th conspiracy, mishandling of national security documents, Georgia election interference, and New York “hush money” allegations were all lawfare against him.
A batch of clemency grants may be on the horizon. The Wall Street Journal said last week, “The president, according to a senior administration official, has taken a particular interest in the work of Alice Johnson, the pardon czar he appointed earlier this year. He regularly asks her, ‘Where are my pardons?’ The White House is expected to announce a substantial batch of pardons in the coming weeks, the official said.”
Fox News, Trump ‘pardon czar’ details how she’ll help incarcerated Americans who ‘paid their dues’ (May 17) (video)
The Wall Street Journal, The Wild West of Presidential Pardons in Trump’s Second Term (May 13)
<><>
BILL INTRODUCED TO SPEED BOP CORRECTIONAL OFFICER HIRING
Representatives Glenn Grothman (R-WI) and Elise Stefanik (R-NY) last week reintroduced the BOP Direct-Hire Authority Act, legislation intended to alleviate BOP staffing shortages by circumventing Office of Personnel Management procedures that can prolong the onboarding process for new hires to over six months.
“One of the main hurdles in President Trump’s effort to reopen Alcatraz will be the ability to quickly hire Correctional Officers,” Grothman said in a press release. “That is why Congress needs to quickly pass this legislation to help the federal prison system which has been understaffed and overwhelmed for years.”
A prior version of the bill was introduced last December as H.R. 6628 but died when the 118th Congress expired at the end of 2024.
Stefanik is chair of the House Republican Leadership Committee.
The Sun, Stefanik supports reintroduction of BOP Direct-Hire Authority Act (May 14)
<><>
SENTENCE REDUCTION ODDS AREN’T GREAT, USSC DATA SHOW
The US Sentencing Commission released some interesting retrospective data on Wednesday, showing that winning sentence reductions based on retroactive Guidelines is not necessarily a sure bet.
In Nov 2023, the Commission adopted Amendment 821, which changed how criminal history is calculated for purposes of figuring a defendant’s advisory sentencing range. The USSC did away with “status points,” the extra two criminal history points applied when a new offense is committed while the offender is on parole, supervised release, or probation. On the other end of the spectrum, the Commission decided that a defendant who had zero criminal history points was entitled to a two-level reduction in his or her Total Offense Level.
The structure of the process for winning a sentence reduction based on retroactive Guidelines changes is governed by 18 USC 3582(c)(2). If the defendant is eligible (which is not the slam-dunk you might think it is), the district court is nevertheless entitled to determine with almost unreviewable discretion whether the offender deserves the full break offered by the new lower Guideline, some of the break, or none at all.
After the Commission’s change in status points became effective, 15,177 federal inmates (9.6 pct of the prison population) applied for reduction. Of those, district courts across the nation granted 36 pct, only about a third of the motions filed. Out of districts with more than 100 applications filed, Eastern Wisconsin was the toughest (97.2 pct denied), with Southern Iowa, Southern New York, Minnesota, and Eastern Arkansas in second place, all around an 80 pct denial rate. Maryland (93.8 pct approval rate), Kansas (66.1 pct approval), and Northern Alabama (61.0 pct approval) were the best.
Defendants who sought the zero-point criminal history point reduction hardly fared better. Of 11,749 applications (7.4 pct of the inmate population) seeking the Guidelines 2-level reduction, only 32.2 pct received reductions. Of districts with more than 100 applications filed, Arizona (91.2 percent denied), followed by Southern Iowa (89.7 percent denied) and South Dakota (88.3 percent denied), were the worst places to be. The best place to get a status point reduction was South Dakota (88.3 pct denied), with Eastern Texas (64.0 pct approval rate), Middle Florida (61.1 pct approval), and New Jersey (47.7 pct approval) as runners up.
The Commission also released compassionate release numbers through March 2025. Since the inception of inmate-filed motions under 18 USC 3582(c)(1)(A) – the compassionate release motion – with the First Step Act in Dec 2018, 12,916 motions have been filed, with 13.7 pct granted. Through Mar 2025, the success rate has held roughly steady – 89 such motions have been granted, 13.4 pct of the total filed.
USSC, Part A of the 2023 Criminal History Amendment Retroactivity Data Report (May 14)
USSC, Part B of the 2023 Criminal History Amendment Retroactivity Data Report (May 14)
USSC, Compassionate Release Data Report, Preliminary Fiscal Year 2025 Cumulative Data through 2nd Quarter (May 14)
<><>
The LISA Newsletter is copyright 2025, LISA Foundation, PO Box 636, Norwalk OH 44857.
Your family may read our newsletter online (or print it to send it to you by snail mail) at www.lisa-legalinfo.com.
PLEASE SHARE THIS NEWSLETTER