Tag Archives: barr

Emergency Continues, And So Does CARES Act Home Confinement – Update for February 22, 2022

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

BOP CARES ACT AUTHORITY EXTENDED

caresbear210104The BOP’s CARES Act authority to place inmates in home confinement expires, according to the law, 30 days after the end of the national pandemic emergency. That emergency was originally declared by President Trump and extended by President Biden. Biden’s last extension was set to expire March 1, 2022, by operation of 50 USC § 1622(d).

Last Friday, Biden extended the national emergency for another year. He said, “The COVID-19 pandemic continues to cause significant risk to the public health and safety of the Nation. For this reason, the national emergency declared on March 13, 2020, and beginning March 1, 2020, must continue in effect beyond March 1, 2022.”

Section 12003(b)(2) of the CARES Act provides that

During the covered emergency period, if the Attorney General finds that emergency conditions will materially affect the functioning of the Bureau, the Director of the Bureau may lengthen the maximum amount of time for which the Director is authorized to place a prisoner in home confinement under the first sentence of section 3624(c)(2) of title 18, United States Code, as the Director determines appropriate.

So the BOP authority continues as long as there’s a national emergency and the Attorney General “finds that emergency conditions will materially affect the functioning of the Bureau.” Attorney General William Barr made that finding on March 26, 2020, and again a week later.

home210218What this means is the BOP’s authority to place people in home confinement under the CARES Act will continue for another year unless Attorney General Merrick Garland would decide the BOP no longer needs to decrease population. Given that the BOP must still absorb another 6,085 federal prisoners from private prisons, that inmate totals are trending upward again, and that the BOP is still understaffed, it is unlikely that the AG will abandon the CARES Act any time soon.

The White House, Notice on the Continuation of the National Emergency Concerning the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-⁠19) Pandemic (February 18, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Barr Declines to Celebrate Festivus – Update for September 29, 2020

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

ATTORNEY GENERAL TO CONGRESS: ‘DROP DEAD’

Jerry Seinfeld popularized the formerly-obscure anti-holiday Festivus, which included “The Airing of Grievances,” an event which immediately follows the festival feast. Attorney General William Barr effectively announced last week that for the House Judiciary Committee, Festivus came early this year.

festivus200929On September 21, the Justice Department declined a congressional oversight committee’s request to hear from various DOJ officials, including BOP Director Michael Carvajal to discuss  the BOP’s COVID-19 response. The reason? The Department has accusing Democrats of having “squandered” their opportunity to get relevant information from Attorney General William Barr this summer by instead using their time to “air grievances” instead of ask questions.

The House Judiciary Committee had asked that Eric S. Dreiband, the head of DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, appear this month to discuss the division, and that Carvajal and Donald Washington, the director of the U.S. Marshals Service, appear for an oversight hearing on Oct. 1.

Barr told Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-New York) that in July, Barr had been advised that he could be asked about police misconduct, voting rights, the coronavirus and federal prisons, and the civil unrest this spring and summer. But, Barr complained, when he appeared before the committee in July  to discuss those issues, but Democrats were more interested in “scolding and insulting” him.

meantome200929“Having squandered its opportunity to conduct a meaningful oversight hearing with the attorney general,” the letter said, “it remains unclear how further public spectacles with other department officials would now — a mere 14 legislative days since the attorney general’s hearing — advance the committee’s legitimate oversight efforts.”

Democrats and their allies argued after the hearing that Mr. Barr would not have answered their questions in good faith had they let him respond, and that he would have filibustered and wasted the time. Better, they said, to use the time to air their grievances.

DOJ argued to Nadler that this did “preciously little to advance any legitimate interest” because the committee as a result of this tactic learned no new information.

Meanwhile, several members of Congress from Virginia demanded answers from the BOP about prison conditions amid the pandemic. Senators Mark Warner (D) and Tim Kaine (R), along with Rep Morgan Griffith (R) are among those behind a letter sent last Tuesday to Director Carvajal.

The lawmakers are disturbed at reports of a lack of personal protective equipment and diminished quality of life for the incarcerated at USP Lee and FCC Petersburg. The letter said at least one prisoner who tested positive for COVID-19 was transferred to USP Lee, which they fear could cause a coronavirus outbreak in Lee County. The letter also alleges Petersburg inmates are being denied showers and workers continue to be denied lunch breaks.

control200511Carvajal responded Wednesday, claiming in a letter that both FCI Petersburg and USP Lee have “ample supplies of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)” that includes face coverings, N95 respirators, gowns and gloves, and other sanitation equipment. The letter did not cite specific numbers.

“Indeed, the Bureau has ensured that all institutions nationwide have ample quantities of PPE, and has also established strategic stockpiles in each of our six regions where PPE can be drop-shipped within one day to any institution that might need additional supplies,” Carvajal wrote in the letter, a copy of which was provided to The Progress-Index.

The Virginia delegation lawmakers also wrote to the DOJ inspector general last Friday, asking that the IG include USP Lee and FCC Petersburg in its remote inspection list. “Our offices have received numerous reports from employees and families of incarcerated individuals regarding the spread of COVID-19 and allegations of deteriorating health and safety conditions within both facilities,” the letter said. “These concerns have been raised multiple times by several of our offices with BOP, and we remain deeply troubled by conditions at the two Virginia correctional facilities,” wrote the lawmakers… Many of our offices have received reports that – despite denials from BOP – cases are increasing and inadequate steps have been taken to limit transmission at this facility.”

prisonfood200919

In their letter, the lawmakers also note that they have received disturbing reports of diminished quality of life for inmates because of the COVID-19 lockdowns, including reports of spoiled food and reduced access to recreation, education, and other essential facilities.

The New York Times, Justice Dept. Denies House Panel’s Request for Officials to Appear After Combative Barr Hearing (September 22, 2020)

Letter from DOJ to Chairman Jerrold Nadler (September 21, 2020)

WCYB-TV, Bristol, Virginia, Federal lawmakers demand answers on COVID-19 conditions in Virginia prisons (September 23, 2020)

Petersburg, Virginia, Progress-Index, Director refutes claims by lawmakers about inadequate PPE at Petersburg federal prison (September 23, 2020)

Augusta Free Press, Virginia leaders urge DOJ to include Virginia correctional facilities in remote inspections (September 26, 2020)

– Thomas L. Root

BOP Relaxes COVID-19 Home Confinement Standard – Update for April 14, 2020

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

BOP LOOSENING CARES ACT HOME CONFINEMENT STANDARDS

An affidavit filed last Friday in a class-action lawsuit against the BOP seeking the release of hundreds of high-risk inmates at FCI Oakdale suggests that standards governing which high-risk inmates can go home may be loosening.

release161117The American Civil Liberties Union sued the BOP in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana a week ago, claiming the Dept of Justice did not go far enough in a directive issued by Attorney General William Barr to begin releasing vulnerable prisoners to home confinement.

In a filing last Friday, the BOP said it was using seven criteria to place inmates in home confinement under the authority granted to it by Section 12003(b)(2) of The CARES Act: 1) The primary offense is not violent, sex offense or terrorism; 2) the inmate has no detainer; 3) mental health care level is less than IV; 4) the inmate’s PATTERN score is minimum; 5) BRAVO (BOP’s existing risk evaluation tool) score is low or minimum; 6) the inmate has completed at least 50% of sentence; and 7) no disciplinary actions within the past 12 months.

However, the FCI Oakdale Associate Warden said in the affidavit last Thursday that the requirement that the inmate have completed half of his sentence in order to qualify has been dropped. The AW also said that he expected that “the institution may consider expanding the criteria for review” even further.

The affidavit noted that the most common reasons for ineligibility appear to be history of previous violence or sex offenses.

Placement in home confinement, once approved, still requires the release plan be evaluated by the US Probation Office. “In order to facilitate faster removal of approved inmates from the prison facility,” the AW said, “the BOP has provided its Wardens with additional guidance allowing the use of non-transfer furloughs up to 30 days in length in specific circumstances. As inmates are approved for home confinement through the above-described review process, they may also be considered for such a furlough if they meet the criteria.”

prisonhealth200313Meanwhile, as more is being learned about COVID-19, medical conditions that were once considered irrelevant are being reconsidered. The CDC reported last week that hypertension, previously discounted as a risk factor, and obesity “were the most common comorbidities seen in patients hospitalized for COVID-19.” The study found that 50% of the COVID-19 hospitalizations studied while 48% had obesity, about 35% reported chronic lung conditions such as asthma, and diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease were seen in 28%.

Notably, the report said, of 580 patients with available race/ethnicity data, 45% were non-Hispanic white, while 33% were non-Hispanic black. A CDC doctor who worked on the study said this suggests “black populations might be disproportionately affected by COVID-19.”

Washington Post, ACLU seeks release of federal prison inmates where 5 died (Apr 6)

Bureau of Prisons, BOP’S COVID-19 INMATE REVIEW UPDATE (filed in Case No. 2:20cv422 (WD La., Apr. 10, 2020)

Medpage, Hypertension, Obesity Common in U.S. COVID-19 Hospitalizations (Apr 8)

Politico, Virus-wracked federal prisons again expand release criteria (Apr 11)

– Thomas L. Root

BOP Directed to Send Some Boomers Home – Update for March 27, 2020

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

ATTORNEY GENERAL TELLS BOP TO SEND SOME PEOPLE HOME

Attorney General William Barr moved yesterday to release some federal inmates at heightened risk from the coronavirus, but he said no one would be freed immediately under the policy because of the need to make sure prisoners are not spreading the virus into the community.

corona200313Barr told the BOP in a memo to prioritize granting home confinement to inmates who were convicted of lower level crimes, have shown good conduct behind bars and have plans for release that won’t put them and others at greater risk for contracting the virus.

“We don’t want our institutions to become petri dishes,” Mr. Barr said at an unrelated news conference. “We have the protocols that are designed to stop that. One of those tools will be identifying vulnerable prisoners who would make more sense to allow to go home to finish their confinement.”

The attorney general said he asked BOP officials last week about protecting vulnerable inmates and lowering the chances of a serious outbreak by lowering prison populations.

“I asked if it was possible to expand home confinement, particularly for those older prisoners who have served substantial parts of their sentences and no longer pose a threat and may have underlying conditions that make them particularly vulnerable,” Barr said.

Barr told prison officials to give priority to inmates held in low and minimum security facilities; to those who haven’t been involved in violence or gang activities; and to those with low PATTERN scores. Those convicted of serious offenses, including sex crimes won’t be eligible, Barr said.

Barr’s guidance overlaps with a provision in the relief bill the U.S. House of Representatives is expected to pass TODAY, which lets the BOP shift federal inmates into home confinement sooner. Under 18 USC § 3624(c) as currently written, home confinement is capped at six months or 10% of a sentence, whichever is shorter. The bill removes that limit during the pandemic. The moves come as prisons are detecting more cases of the deadly virus.

release160523As of Thursday morning, Barr said six federal inmates and four staffers had tested positive for the virus, prompting the lockdown of several facilities, including ones in New York City, Atlanta and Louisiana. Barr said he’s getting reports of additional cases as well, but didn’t have the details.

As of yesterday’s 3 pm BOP update, the number had climbed to 10 inmates and eight staff, at MDC Brooklyn, MCC New York, USP Atlanta, FCI Oakdale and in halfway houses in Phoenix and Brooklyn. Staff have tested positive at Butner, NC; Ray Brook, NY; New York City; Danbury, CT; Yazoo City, MS; Leavenworth, KS; Atlanta, GA; and Grand Prairie, TX.

Criminal justice experts welcomed the idea of releasing more inmates to home confinement, but hoped the BOP would break its track record of granting release or home confinement in fewer cases than it could. Kyle O’Dowd, associate executive director of policy for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, told Law360 that while the law and the memo are steps in the right direction, it remains to be seen how the BOP will carry them out.

“My concern is that it won’t be implemented as robustly as it needs to be. There is a history of BOP being pretty conservative in their application of authorities they already have,” O’Dowd said.

Any prisoners moved out of federal facilities as part of the effort would be held in quarantine within the prison for 14 days before release to make sure they are not infectious, Barr’s memo said. Those convicted of sex offenses would not be considered for release, and those serving time for “serious offenses“ would have less chance of getting out, the directive said.

In some cases, vulnerable prisoners might be at less risk in jail than they would be at home, Barr argued. “Many inmates will be safer in BOP facilities where the population is controlled and there is ready access to doctors and medical care,“ he wrote.

Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman wrote in his Sentencing Law and Policy blog that

[e]ven assuming that only a very small percentage of prisoners, say, only 1 out of every 15 current federal prisoners, meet the home confinement criteria, that would still mean that well over 11,000 federal prisoners would be eligible to head home to serve out the rest of their sentences. Because BOP has a well-earn reputation for being unwilling or unable to help prisoners get out of federal facilities early, I am not so confident that we will soon be seeing thousands of federal prisoners heading home. But the directive from AG Barr now would seem to make that more of a possibility.

Politico, Feds may send some prisoners home due to virus risk (Mar. 26, 2020)

Wall Street Journal, Barr Tells Federal Prisons to Increase Use of Home Confinement, Fearing Spread of Coronavirus (Mar. 26, 2020)

Law360.com, Federal Prisons Can Send More Inmates Home. Will They? (Mar. 26)

Sentencing Law and Policy, Will thousands of federal prisoners be eligible for home confinement under AG Barr’s new guidelines? (Mar. 26)

– Thomas L. Root

DOJ Works to Undermine Fair Sentencing Act in Name of ‘Fairness’ – Update for November 12, 2019

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

THIS COMES AS NO SURPRISE

strict191112The Department of Justice is interpreting the First Step Act in a way that keeps more inmates serving crack sentences behind bars longer, even as President Trump touts his administration’s role in passage of First Step, the law that made crack-cocaine sentence relief available to pre-Fair Sentencing Act defendants.

The Washington Post report last week confirmed what most people already know (and what Reuters reported several months ago), that DOJ is arguing that a defendant’s sentence length, when resentenced under the Fair Sentencing Act, should be based on the amount of crack cocaine that his or her Presentence Report found the defendant actually possessed or trafficked, rather than the amount stated in the indictment and which the jury found or the defendant pled. The Post reported that federal prosecutors have made the argument in hundreds of cases.

The distinction is crucial. The amount of crack specified in the indictment must be proven by the government to a jury. The presentence report, on the other hand, is a loosey-goosey collection of the prosecution’s version of the offense and all of the collected but unsubstantiated law enforcement gossip about the defendant that makes him or her look even worse than reality does. The standard of proof is low, the procedures amorphous, and the judge all too willing to not decide evidentiary disputes because they simply do not matter to the court in the sentencing process.

looseygoosey191112As a result, while a defendant may have been found guilty of the offense in the indictment, for instance, distribution of more than 50 grams of crack, the presentence report may cite “reliable sources” who say the defendant possessed maybe a gram a week for two years. The presentence report does some simple addition, and a total of 730 grams results.

The Post said DOJ was even seeking to reincarcerate some people already released under the retroactive FSA. One targeted former inmate was Gregory Allen, who appeared at a White House event in April to celebrate passage of the law. President Trump even called Greg to the microphone.

Before the White House event, prosecutors had lost their bid to keep Allen behind bars. Even as the President asked Greg to speak, the government was appealing its loss. DOJ dropped its appeal about two weeks after Greg’s appearance.

A DOJ spokesman defended the department’s First Step interpretation in an interview with the Post. He said DOJ’s position was justified because prosecutors in years past didn’t need to prove large amounts of drugs to obtain long prison sentences. Under today’s sentencing regime, prosecutors would likely charge the offenders with having larger drug quantities, DOJ hypothesizes. “The government’s position is that the text of the statute requires courts to look at the quantity of crack that was part of the actual crime,” the spokesman argued. “This is a fairness issue.”

Judges have rejected the DOJ interpretation in a majority of cases reviewed by the Post. But at least five federal judges have agreed with the DOJ interpretation, and others have withheld judgment until appeals courts decide the issue.

In the weeks after the bill became law, many AUSAs allowed inmate petitions for early release to go unchallenged. Then, at the direction of the DOJ, prosecutors began to reverse course, court records show. In March, AUSA Jennifer Bockhorst of ND WVa asked federal judges to place a hold on more than two dozen applications for relief, some of which she had not previously opposed. She wrote that she expected to oppose at least some of those applications based on new guidance from the Justice Department.

Some of the people who helped write the legislation also disagree, including Brett Tolman, a former US attorney in Utah. He notes that the First Step text does not explicitly instruct courts to consider the actual amount of crack an offender allegedly had. “This is not a faithful implementation of this part of the First Step Act,” Tolman told the Post. “At some point, they figured out a way to come back and argue that it wouldn’t apply to as many people.”

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-New York), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, accused DOJ at a congressional hearing last month of “trying to sabotage” the law by interpreting it in this way.

Attorney General Barr has reportedly worried that early releases of inmates under the law will increase crime. Anonymous officials told the Post that Barr is concerned the administration will be blamed if crime increases.

A great example of the kind of blame the AG hoped to duck is illustrated by the person of Rhode Island defendant Joel Francisco, released earlier under First Step this year after 14 years into a life sentence for selling crack. We previously reported he was on the run after being charged with a murder. He has since been arrested, and last week, CNN made his crime a national story.

Also last week, a routine resentencing in Connecticut made national headlines, when Joel Soto’s 17-year sentence was cut to time served, under the lurid headine, “‘Joe Crack’ asks for reduced sentence in drug case.”

“More than 4,700 inmates have been released from prison under the law since its signing late last year,” CNN reported, “and federal officials believe Francisco is the first among them to be accused of murder. While an outlier, his case is raising questions and resurfacing concerns from detractors of the legislation.”

“cotton190502This case is upsetting but it’s not a surprise,” said Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Arkansas), one of First Step’s biggest critics on Capitol Hill. “Letting violent felons out of prison early as the First Step Act did leads to more crime and more victims.”

Other lawmakers who supported the bill called the incident a tragedy, but hoped that it wouldn’t stand in the way of more progress. “If you’re looking at reforming the criminal justice system you cannot pick an individual criminal act to then raise the question as to whether or not you do reforms to the system,” said Rep. Karen Bass (D-California), a member of the House Judiciary Committee and the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus.

None of this should surprise anyone. Despite the First Step Act rhetoric, The New York Times reported last week that despite bipartisan calls to treat drug addiction as a public health issue rather than as a crime — and despite the legalization of marijuana in more states — arrests for drugs increased again last year. Such arrests have increased 15% since Trump took office.

Washington Post, Crack cocaine quantities at issue as DOJ opposes some early releases under First Step Act (Nov. 7)

ABA Journal, Crack cocaine quantities at issue as DOJ opposes some early releases under First Step Act (Nov. 8)

CNN, He was one of the first prisoners released under Trump’s criminal justice reform law. Now he’s accused of murder (Nov. 9)

Newport News, Virginia, Daily Press, ‘Joe Crack’ asks for reduced sentence in drug case (Nov. 2)

The New York Times, Is the ‘War on Drugs’ Over? Arrest Statistics Say No (Nov. 5)

– Thomas L. Root

Justice Dept. Picks First Step Foe to Spearhead Recidivism Risk Standard Adoption – Update for April 15, 2019

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

HAS DOJ SENT THE FOX TO GUARD THE HENHOUSE?

As we observed last Tuesday, the Dept. of Justice has announced that it had appointed the Hudson Institute, a right-of-center think tank best known for its national security work, to design a risk-assessment tool that must be in place before prisoners can receive earned-time credit for completing BOP programs designed to reduce recidivism.

bog190312

The appointment, required by the First Step Act to be in place by Jan. 21, was only 78 days late.

First Step requires that a prisoner’s risk of recidivism (different from security and custody levels) be assessed before he or she starts programming. The risk can go up or down, depending on the inmate’s progress. The lower a prisoner’s risk, the more credit that can be earned.

However, the Act does not specify how a person’s recidivism risk level should be calculated. Instead, it instructs the attorney general to consult with an “independent review committee” to design the system.

DOJ said that Hudson Institute will host the independent review committee. Hudson has the discretion to appoint committee members, who will work to advise on the shape of the final risk-adjustment tool.

henhouse180307Some lawmakers from both parties who backed First Step Act expressed concern late last week at Hudson’s appointment. “I’m a little bit worried that we just let a fox in the chicken coop here,” Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois) said during a confirmation hearing last week. “This… think tank… published an article entitled, ‘Why Trump Should Oppose Criminal-Justice Reform…’ [and has] now been chosen by the Department of Justice and Trump administration to be part of this so-called independent review system.”

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) described the institute as an “opponent of the First Step Act… I don’t see a lot of good faith in implementing this law right now,” Lee said. “And it’s become increasingly clear to me in the last few days that some Department of Justice officials at least don’t like the First Step Act, and they seem not to care that Congress passed this law and that President Trump signed this into law.”

The Hudson Institute, founded in 1961, is known for its work on national security and foreign policy, though it also focuses on economics and domestic policy. For the First Step Act, it has announced six committee members so far who will develop the risk assessment program, one of whom is Hudson’s chief operating officer, John Walters.

Walters once wrote that it was a “great urban myth” that the country was imprisoning too many people for drug possession and that the 100:1 crack-to-powder cocaine disparity was merely a “perceived,” not a real, racial injustice. In 2015, Walters wrote that the concept of “mass incarceration” was a myth, and that “the great majority of federal prisoners appear to be incarcerated because they were, properly, adjudged guilty and justly sentenced.”

release160523The New York Times reported last Tuesday that First Step’s retroactive application of the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act has already “prompt[ed] 800 sentencing reductions already, according to the Justice Department. Of that group, nearly 650 inmates have been released from prison. Another 22 inmates have received sentencing reductions under a compassionate release program that is part of the law.” It reported last Saturday that since First Step was passed, 10 prisoners of 23 that have so far been deemed eligible have been released under the First Step’s Elderly Offender Home Detention (EOHD) program.

Testifying last Tuesday before the Appropriations Subcommittee of the House Committee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies, Attorney General William Barr promised “to robustly fund and diligently implement [First Step] at the Department.”

If you want to know where the real headwinds to First Step will come from, look no further that last Saturday’s Times. It’s one thing to support criminal justice reform in the abstract. But when it comes to individuals, the Gray Lady makes it clear that her anti-felon “lock-’em-up” biases are every bit as finely honed as Sen. Tom Cotton’s ever were.

unforgivenfelon190415The newspaper breathlessly reported on one inmate released under EOHD: “The First Step Act offered prisoner rehabilitation programs and overhauled sentencing policies that supporters claimed had a disproportionate effect on poor defendants, especially minorities. But one person who benefited from the law was Hassan Nemazee, who was once an investor of enormous wealth and who donated heavily to Democratic political causes.” The Times reported that “Mr. Nemazee was charged in 2009 with orchestrating a scheme that defrauded banks of nearly $300 million,” and it complained that home detention “feels a lot like freedom.”

Once the media start picking at the offenses for which inmates who benefit from First Step were convicted, public outrage will not be far behind.

Washington Free Beacon, “DOJ Taps Conservative Think Tank to Help Implement FIRST STEP Act” (Apr. 8)

Mother Jones, Trump Keeps Celebrating Prison Reform. His Administration’s Latest Move Could Sabotage It (Apr. 11)

New York Times, Justice Dept. Works on Applying Sentencing Law as Critics Point to Delays (Apr. 8)

New York Times, He Committed a $300 Million Fraud, but Left Prison Under Trump’s Justice Overhaul (Apr. 13)

– Thomas L. Root

After Partying Last Week, First Step Finally Gets Down to Business – Update for April 9, 2019

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

FIRST STEP CELEBRATED, BUT WORRIES OVER IMPLEMENTATION REMAIN

Amid questions by some critics about the Administration’s support for the First Step Act, the Dept. of Justice’s National Institute of Justice (NIJ) yesterday announced the selection of the Hudson Institute to host the Independent Review Committee mandated by the Act to develop and implement risk and needs assessment tools and evidence-based recidivism reduction programs for the Bureau of Prisons.

firststepB180814“The Department of Justice is committed to implementing the First Step Act,” a DOJ press release quoted Attorney General William Barr as saying. “The Independent Review Committee plays an important role in that effort by assisting in the development of a new risk and needs assessment system and improvements to our recidivism reduction programming.”

NIJ also announced that it is contracting with outside researchers, including Grant Duwe, Ph.D., Zachary Hamilton Ph.D., and Angela Hawken Ph.D., for  consultation on the DOJ’s development of the risk and needs assessment system under the Act.  Dr. Duwe is the Director of Research for the Minnesota Department of Corrections, and an expert on the development of recidivism risk assessment systems. Dr. Hamilton is an Associate Professor of Criminal Justice and Criminology and the Director of the Washington State Institute for Criminal Justice, and focuses on treatment matching through risk and needs assessment systems. Dr. Hawken is a Professor of Public Policy at the New York University Marron Institute, and is the founder and director of New York University’s Litmus/BetaGov program, which assists in the development and validation of data-driven policies.

The announcement comes on the heels of last week’s White House  “First Step Act Celebration,” which was intended to bring attention to a rare piece of bipartisan legislation President Trump passed last year, and which he plans to highlight on the campaign trail. He also announced plans for a “Second Step Act,” focused on easing employment barriers for formerly incarcerated people.

“We are proving we’re a nation that believes in redemption,” Trump said, describing the “second step” legislation as featuring a $88 million funding request for prisoner social reentry programs. “The ‘Second Step Act’ will be focused on successful reentry and reduced unemployment for Americans with past criminal records, and that’s what we’re starting right away.”

“As president, I pledged to work with both parties for the good of the whole nation,” Mr. Trump said at the East Room gathering, pointing to the legislation as an example of bipartisan work that he said was “so important to me.”

But even as they danced at the White House, several observers expressed skepticism that the now-passed bill will enjoy the Administration’s full support.

money160118The Administration’s budget, released last month, listed only $14 million to pay for the First Step Act’s programs. The law specifically asked for $75 million a year for five years, beginning in 2019. The Office of Management and Budget, however, noted that the bill passed after the budget had already been finalized, and that the White House intended to revisit First Step Act funding.

Ensuring that First Step is adequately funded is crucial to its effectiveness, said Nancy La Vigne of the Urban Institute. “We always recognized that without proper funding, the First Step Act is really nothing more than window dressing,” she said.

Mr. Trump said that “my administration intends to fully fund and implement this historic law.”  On Apr. 2, the White House announced Trump will ask Congress for $147 million to implement First Step, far above the $14 million in the original budget.

risky-business-4fea6b87b70a6First Step requires development of a risk and needs assessment tool to assess inmates and determine what types of programs reduce recidivism and the incentives they would receive. The Dept. of Justice missed the Jan. 21 deadline for forming the committee tasked with developing the risk assessment standard, instead starting the committee formation process only yesterday. The Crime Report said last Monday, “It’s not clear whether the government will meet the July deadline for developing the system.”

Kevin Ring, president of Families Against Mandatory Minimums, says there hasn’t been much clarity from the administration on the status of these measures.

“All the timelines were ambitious, so it’s not surprising that they haven’t met them all,” Ring said. “It’s just it seems to be a bit of a black box. We don’t know what’s taking so long.”

The New York Times today observed that

Putting the law into practice quickly became complicated. The government partly shut down one day after Congress passed the bill and sent it to President Trump to sign into law, and many of the Justice Department employees who would have worked to fulfill it went on furlough. The shutdown, the longest in history, lasted through the end of January.

That has given law enforcement officials just over two months to start carrying out a complicated piece of legislation, a senior Justice Department official said in defending their pace… The criminal justice overhaul was also passed during intense tumult at the top of the Justice Department, which oversees the Bureau of Prisons and would be responsible for carrying out much of the new legislation.

The New York Times, Justice Dept. Works on Applying Sentencing Law as Critics Point to Delays (Apr. 9)

Hudson Institute, Hudson Institute To Host First Step Act’s Independent Review Committee (Apr. 8)

Washington Examiner, Trump announces Second Step Act to help ex-prisoners find work (Apr. 1)

The Crime Report, As White House Celebrates First Step Act, Inmate Risk-Assessment Tool Lags (Apr. 1)

The New York Times, Trump Celebrates Criminal Justice Overhaul Amid Doubts It Will Be Fully Funded (Apr. 1)

NPR, 3 Months Into New Criminal Justice Law, Success For Some And Snafus For Others (Apr. 1)

– Thomas L. Root

Employers Commit to Hire Felons After First Step, But Much Remains to be Done – Update for February 4, 2019

Leave a comment

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

HOUSEKEEPING CONCERNS, LOWER EXPECTATIONS, AFTER FIRST STEP

Now that the First Step Act is law, the question becomes what is next at the federal level and what policy innovations can state governments develop to continue the national momentum toward a more efficient and effective justice system.

Rosie190204The next order of business, according to The Hill, is for the Senate to confirm William Barr as Attorney General. Barr would be responsible for selecting a new director for the Bureau of Prisons, as well as for ensuring that the BOP accurately administers the codified risk assessment system for low-level, non-violent offenders who are eligible for release, and provide these inmates with the programs required by the Act. The statutory deadline for adopting the risk-assessment system is five and a half months away.

While the sentencing reforms contained in the First Step Act were secondary to the prison reforms that are to be administered by the Dept of Justice, further sentencing improvements are possible through the U.S. Sentencing Commission. However, the Commission has lacked a quorum since last December. The acting chair, Judge William Pryor of the 11th Circuit, is currently awaiting renomination by the White House and confirmation by the Senate. Until the Commission gains two more commissioners, it will be unable to adopt any Guidelines amendments. The Commission customarily issues amendments every April, which become effective November 1st unless Congress vetoes them ahead of time. Only twice in its 30-year history has the Commission failed to adopt any Guidelines amendments. The most recent time was 2017, when the Commission – as it does now – lacked a quorum.

Meanwhile, conservative billionaire industrialist Charles Koch, who spearheaded business support for First Step, has challenged a broad coalition of business groups is to hire workers with criminal backgrounds in the wake of First Step’s passage.

Koch has enlisted the support of the Society for Human Resource Management, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Retail Federation, the National Restaurant Association and the American Staffing Association. Together, the groups represent businesses that employ roughly 60% of the American workforce.

First Step made changes in the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act retroactive, allowing an estimated 3,000 people still serving long convictions for crack cocaine to petition for a reduction in their sentences. The provision allowed Matthew Charles, whose case was widely publicized in 2017, to exit prison at the end of 2018. Michael Holley, a federal defender who worked on Charles case, said that Charles was an ideal candidate for sentencing reduction, and his case was ideally positioned to be heard right away.

release160523“It was all primed for the government to look at,” he said. “We’d had all this litigation in the past year… so the judge was fully aware of his case and the prosecutor was fully aware of the case.” The government responded to the Charles petition ahead of the deadline to indicate no opposition the Charles’ request, Holley said, allowing him to get out even more quickly.

For other people, the process will take longer. The Federal Public Defenders Offices nationally have compiled a list of people in their records who might be able to benefit from the law, and attorneys in the office are reviewing the cases for anyone they find to be eligible.

Prosecutors are able to contest a defendant’s eligibility, and can argue that an individual does not deserve a sentence reduction, meaning the process, like 18 USC 3582(c)(2) proceedings, may get protracted.

The Hill, Federal criminal justice reform is now law: What comes next? (Jan. 26)

Law360, For Inmates, Sentencing Reforms Bring Hope And Frustration (Jan. 27)

CNBC, Koch network leads coalition urging businesses to hire former inmates (Jan. 27)

– Thomas L. Root