Tag Archives: trump

DeSantis Wants to Stop the ‘Jailbreak’ – Update for June 6, 2023

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.

WHO CARES ABOUT THE 2024 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION? YOU SHOULD.

turnback230606Cher used to croon about how nice things could be if she could only turn back time.

I give you Cher-lovin’ Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. Ron, running for the Republican presidential nomination behind former President Donald Trump, said a week ago that if elected president, he would call on Congress to repeal the First Step Act.

DeSantis criticized the Act as “basically a jailbreak bill.”

“So one of the things I would want to do as president is go to Congress and seek the repeal of the First Step Act,” DeSantis said. “If you are in jail, you should serve your time. And the idea that they’re releasing people who have not been rehabilitated early so that they can prey on people in our society is a huge, huge mistake.”

DeSantis has apparently forgotten that when he was in the House of Representatives in 2018, he voted for the House version of the bill, a much more pro-prisoner bill than the one that finally became First Step. He resigned his seat to run for governor before the final version passed.

rightthings230606Now many would say that basing a presidential campaign on not being Donald Trump is perhaps a canny strategy. And many also opine that Trump only championed the First Step Act because Jared Kushner – who really believed in its goals – convinced the then-president that black voters would love him for it. But James Carville was correct when he said that the right things usually get done for the wrong reasons.

The Daily Beast (a liberal publication) argued last week that First Step was a “bipartisan recognition that the growth of our carceral state has not been an effective crime deterrent… There are many people still in federal prisons who don’t need to be there, because they have aged out of crime and pose little risk to the community. These people, who are disproportionately Black and Latino, should be allowed to return to the workforce and their families.”

The Daily Beast called on Congress to build on the First Step Act by passing the First Step Implementation Act and the Safer Detention Act. “Fifty years after the beginning of mass incarceration, presidential candidates should be making the case for how they will do their part to end it,” the Beast wrote. “Congress should pass the First Step Implementation Act and Safer Detention Act and the current and future administrations must do their part to support these and other critical reforms and ensure their successful implementation.”

marijuana220412In other discouraging news, the Kiplinger letter reported last week that the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is planning to propose a ban on delta-8 THC, CBD, and other alternative cannabinoids derived from hemp.

Those in support of the potential ban argue that delta-8 THC and other hemp-derived cannabinoids are created through “chemical synthesis” and should be classified as controlled substances. Kiplinger said a ban would be a “major step in the wrong direction.”

The Hill, DeSantis says he would push to repeal Trump criminal justice reform if elected (May 26, 2023)

Daily Beast, Ron DeSantis Is Flat-out Wrong About the First Step Act (June 2, 2023)

The Kiplinger Letter, Is a Possible Delta-8 THC Ban in the Works? (June 2, 2023)

– Thomas L. Root

President Packs USSC With Some Good Picks – Update for May 12, 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.

SENTENCING COMMISSION DROUGHT IS LIFTING

noquorum191016President Biden yesterday nominated a bipartisan slate of seven candidates to serve as commissioners on the U.S. Sentencing Commission. If confirmed, the nominees will revitalize the USSC, giving it its first quorum in almost four years.

The list includes U.S. District Judge Carlton W. Reeves (Southern District of Mississippi). If confirmed by the Senate, he will be the first black jurist to chair the 33-year-old commission’s history.

By statute, the Commission must be bipartisan and consist of at least three federal judges and no more than four members of each political party.

Biden’s planned nominees include three active judges and four attorneys. Of those nominees, two have experience as public defenders. Nominees also include

• Laura Mate, a former assistant federal public defender in the Western District of Washington, serves as Sentencing Resource Counsel for the Federal Public and Community Defenders in Arizona;

• Judge Luis Felipe Restrepo, appointed by President Obama to serve on the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit and a former assistant federal public defender in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania;

• Claire McCusker Murray, formerly principal deputy associate attorney general in the Dept. of Justice during the Trump Administration;

• Judge Claria Horn Boom, appointed by President Trump to the U.S. District Courts for both the Eastern and Western Districts of Kentucky;

• Former U.S. District Judge John Gleeson (EDNY), a partner at Debevoise and Plimpton LLP, who enjoys close to rock-star status as a forward-thinking sentence reformer;

• Candice Wong, Assistant United States Attorney and Chief of the Violence Reduction and Trafficking Offenses Section in the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia.

USSC170511The Sentencing Commission has lacked a full slate of commissioners for the entirety of the Trump Administration, and has not had a quorum since the First Step Act passed in December 2018. That is why no guideline has been amended since the November 2018 amendments went into force.

Trump nominated four commissioners in August 2020, two of whom – Judges Restrepo and Boom – were renominated yesterday. Their nominations expired when the Senate did not act on them prior to the end of the 116th Congress in January 2021.

The Commission has a stack of work waiting for its attention, chief among the issues being compassionate release. Last November, the sole remaining member of the Commission at the time, Senior Judge Charles Breyer (N.D. Cal.) complained to Reuters that the lack of quorum meant the Commission could not provide guidance on how to implement compassionate release, creating a “vacuum” in which judges inconsistently decide whether inmates under the measure can secure a sentence reduction under 18 USC § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Some people were granted compassionate release for reasons that other judges found insufficient,” he said. “There was no standard. That’s a problem when you try to implement a policy on a nationwide basis.” The Commission’s outdated Guideline 1B1.13, ignored by most circuits but used as a bludgeon by others, was perhaps the primary mischief-maker, but with no quorum, the USSC has been powerless to fix things.

Don’t expect immediate miracles. The Commission normally works on a 12-month cycle, with proposed topics for amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines issued late in the year, followed by the actual amendments early in the following year, and a final slate of amendments by May 1. Under the law, the amendments take effect on November 1, unless Congress votes to veto one or all of them.

This means that the most anyone can hope for would be amendments to take effect on November 1, 2023.

progress220512Still, the slate of new commissioners would be the most defendant-friendly bunch to ever run the USSC. Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman wrote in his Sentencing Law and Policy blog yesterday, “Because these selections have surely been made in consultation with Senate leadership, I am reasonably hopeful that hearings and a confirmation of these nominees could proceed swiftly. (But that may be wishful thinking, as was my thinking that these needed nominees would come a lot sooner.) There is lots of work ahead for these nominees (and lots of blog posts to follow about them and their likely agenda), but for now I will be content with just a ‘Huzzah!’”

He’s right.  Its progress, however slow in coming.

Bloomberg Law, Biden Names Seven to Restock US Sentencing Commission (May 11, 2022)

The White House, President Biden Nominates Bipartisan Slate for the United States Sentencing Commission (May 11, 2022)

The White House, President Donald J. Trump Announces Intent to Nominate and Appoint Individuals to Key Administration Posts (August 12, 2021)

Reuters, U.S. sentencing panel’s last member Breyer urges Biden to revive commission (November 11, 2021)

Sentencing Law and Policy, Prez Biden finally announces a full slate of nominees to the US Sentencing Commission (May 11, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Did the BOP’s New ETC Rules Get Hijacked By Biden? – Update for January 18, 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.

THE UNSEEN HAND WRITES NEW BOP EARNED TIME RULES?

The Federal Bureau of Prisons last week announced final rules for granting federal time credits (“FTCs”) to inmates who successfully complete specified programs designed to reduce recidivism or engage in what the statute calls “productive activities.”

In November 2020, the BOP finally got around to proposing rules for granting FTCs under the incentives program authorized two years before in the First Step Act. The agency proposed a rule that would require 240 classroom hours of successful programming in order for an inmate to receive a mere 15 days credit on his or her sentence. At the time, I said, “In the BOP, a 500-hour program takes 12-18 months to complete. That may seem like a fairly substantial commitment for a month more of home confinement. But it is consistent with what we’ve come to expect from the BOP: given a chance to interpret the extent of its authority to be lenient, it invariably interprets that authority in the most chary way possible.”

[Editor’s note: Yes, I said “most chary.” My wife the grammarian, has since pointed out that the superlative of “chary” is “chariest.” I’d fire her, but she’s been right too many times before.]

icecreamsundae210118In my experience practicing administrative law back in the day, when an agency rolled out proposed rules in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for public comment, the final product looked a lot like what had been proposed, perhaps with a tweak here and there. Once in a blue moon, an agency might back off after an especially loud and sustained hue and cry from the industry and public, but rulemaking was a lot like ordering an ice cream sundae – you could specify which sprinkle, nuts, sauce, and cherry you wanted on it, but the 95% of it that was ice cream was fixed and was not going to change.

The history of agency rulemaking since the passage of the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 makes what happened to the FTC rules so puzzling. It’s like the BOP specified an ice cream sundae, but delivered a cup of mashed potatoes and gravy instead.

The new rules, already being applied to hundreds if not thousands of inmates, represent a total repudiation of the BOP’s proposed rules announced a year ago.

I reported on the changes in the rules – the “what” – last Friday. What I didn’t talk about was the “why.” Even now, I am unsure of what caused the sea change at the BOP, but there are some hints. Traditionally, the BOP director has scrambled to imprint any favorable program with his or her initials. Yet, last week, BOP Director Michael Carvajal was strangely silent, while Attorney General Merrick Garland took a victory lap in a press release. The fact that the Attorney General issued a statement supporting the new rules, but Carvajal did not, suggests that the Biden DOJ grabbed hold of the FTC process after the BOP sought to impose Draconian limitations on the program.

sycophant220118Several members of Congress – such as Richard Durbin (D-IL), chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), John Cornyn, (R-TX) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), on the Senate side, and Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), on the House side – criticized the proposed rules in public comments. That may have played a factor as well. The BOP’s report adopting the final rule mentioned their comments, such as this excerpt from Sens. Whitehouse’s and Cornyn’s filing:

The proposed rule’s definition of a “day” of program participation does not adequately reward engagement with [EBBR programs] and PAs consistent with the First Step Act. . . Because BOP programs do not run for eight hours per day, the proposed rule would require individuals to attend an EBRR or PA for several calendar days before they earned a full “day” of time credit. . . It was not our intent as drafters of the legislation that BOP define a “day” in this way. Nor did Congress ever consider it. . . The proposed rule’s narrow definition of a “day” does not adequately incentivize program participation and reduce recidivism as intended by the First Step Act.

The fact that the legislators’ comments were singled out approvingly – maybe even fawningly – in the report would permit a reasonable person to infer that the BOP was sending the two Judiciary Committees a message that their concerns were being addressed.

The Hill noted that the new rules were announced “just one week after the DOJ revealed that BOP Director Michael Carvajal would be resigning from his post. He had faced criticism during his time as chief of the bureau.” Fox News said “the Biden administration has faced increased pressure from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers to do more to put in place additional aspects of the First Step Act, and the bureau has been accused of dragging its feet.” Associated Press observed that the final rules came “about two months after the department’s inspector general sounded an alarm that the Bureau of Prisons had not applied the earned time credits to about 60,000 federal inmates who had completed the programs.”

It seemed strange that several media outlets connected the Director’s departure with the release of the rules. It is fair to note that there is no logical reason for his announcing the retirement on January 6th, especially when the actual date was left open (he said he would stay on until a new director is appointed). The timing, as The Hill implied, may be linked to the dramatic turn in the BOP’s approach to FTCs.

bidensuperman210201

Likewise, Fox News may have settled on another reason. President Biden has taken a lot of heat recently for doing nothing on criminal justice reform. Probably because he has done nothing. Hijacking the rules and rewriting them the way Congressional Democrats would love and Congressional Republicans would accept may have been seen by the White House as a cheap fix: liberal FTC rules did not require Congressional approval and conservatives could hardly complain, because all Biden was doing was carrying forward a program President Trump proudly owned, the First Step Act.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not complaining that the BOP did the right thing. I’m puzzled, that’s all.

Associated Press, Thousands of federal inmates to be released under 2018 law (January 13, 2022)

Dept of Justice, Justice Department Announces New Rule Implementing Federal Time Credits Program Established by the First Step Act (January 13, 2022)

BOP, Final Rules for Federal Time Credits Program (January 13, 2022)

BOP, FSA Time Credits (January 13, 2022)

The Hill, Thousands of federal inmates being released this week under law signed by Trump (January 13, 2022)

Fox News, Federal inmates to be released under ‘time credits’ program (January 13, 2022)

– Thomas L. Root

Biden DOJ Flips, Says CARES Act People Can Stay Home – Update for December 22, 2021

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.

HOME FOR THE HOLIDAYS

holidays211222Eleven months of uncertainty came to an abrupt and welcome end yesterday as Attorney General Merrick Garland announced that the Dept. of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel had reversed its January 2021 opinion, concluding that inmates sent to home confinement under the CARES Act will not have to return to prison when the COVID-19 national pandemic emergency ends. 

The decision reversed the OLC’s swan song from the last days of the Trump Administration that

the CARES Act authorizes the Director of BOP to place prisoners in home confinement only during the statute’s covered emergency period and when the Attorney General finds that the emergency conditions are materially affecting BOP’s functioning. Should that period end, or should the Attorney General revoke the finding, the Bureau would be required to recall the prisoners to correctional facilities unless they are otherwise eligible for home confinement under 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(2). We also conclude that the general imprisonment authorities of 18 U.S.C. § 3621(a) and (b) do not supplement the CARES Act authority to authorize home confinement under the Act beyond the limits of section 3624(c)(2).

Last July, things looked dire when the New York Times reported that the Biden DOJ had reviewed the OLC opinion and concluded that it was right. That was perhaps a trial balloon, because DOJ made no official announcement about any review. Nevertheless, the Times story unleashed a storm of criticism.

But yesterday, the Biden DOJ left a shiny gift under the tree for about 4,000 federal prisoners on home confinement. The new OLC memorandum begins

This Office concluded in January 2021 that, when the COVID-19 emergency ends, the Bureau of Prisons will be required to recall all prisoners placed in extended home confinement under section 12003(b)(2) of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act who are not otherwise eligible for home confinement under 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(2). Having been asked to reconsider, we now conclude that section12003(b)(2) and the Bureau’s preexisting authorities are better read to give the Bureau discretion to permit prisoners in extended home confinement to remain there.

gift211222The New York Times said this morning that the OLC’s reversal “was a rare instance when the department under Attorney General Merrick B. Garland reversed a high-profile Trump-era decision. It was also a victory for criminal justice advocates.”

But not completely unexpected. During a Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearing last October, Garland said, “It would be a terrible policy to return these people to prison after they have shown that they are able to live in home confinement without violations, and as a consequence, we are reviewing the OLC memorandum… [and] all about other authorities that Congress may have given us to permit us to keep people on home confinement.”

He promised Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) that “we’re not in a circumstance where anybody will be returned before we have completed that review and implemented any changes we need to make.” At that session, Committee Chairman Richard Durbin (D-IL) complained that he was “frustrated by DOJ’s handling of COVID and prison issues.”

Yesterday, Garland said in a statement, “Thousands of people on home confinement have reconnected with their families, have found gainful employment and have followed the rules. In light of today’s Office of Legal Counsel opinion, I have directed that the Department engage in a rulemaking process to ensure that the Department lives up to the letter and the spirit of the CARES Act. We will exercise our authority so that those who have made rehabilitative progress and complied with the conditions of home confinement, and who in the interests of justice should be given an opportunity to continue transitioning back to society, are not unnecessarily returned to prison.”

A White House spokesman said in a statement that President Biden welcomed the change, noting “the relief it will mean for thousands of individuals on home confinement who have worked hard toward rehabilitation and are contributing to their communities.”

christmasunderpants211222Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman had an interesting observation about Garland’s statement in his Sentencing Law and Policy blog: “This statement by AG Garland suggests that DOJ is now going to engage in ‘rulemaking’ that will create a set of requirements or criteria about who may get to stay on home confinement and who might be returned to prison after the pandemic ends. I am not sure how that rulemaking process will work, but I am sure the AG statement is hinting (or flat-out saying) that there will still be some in the “home confinement cohort” who may need to worry about eventually heading back to federal prison.”

For now, the impetus for prisoners to qualify for CARES Act placement, which can continue as long as the emergency lasts (and if omicron has anything to say about it, it will be awhile) will increase. CARES Act placement will rightly be seen as not just a furlough but as a bus ticket home. And we’ll just have to see whether a DOJ rulemaking wants to turn that shiny gift Biden left under the tree into a pair of underpants.

The New York Times, Biden Legal Team Decides Inmates Must Return to Prison After Covid Emergency (July 19, 2021)

The New York Times, Some Inmates Can Stay Confined at Home After Covid Emergency, Justice Dept. Says (December 22, 2021)

Sentencing Law and Policy, New OLC opinion memo concluding CARES Act “grants BOP discretion to permit prisoners in extended home confinement to remain there” (December 21, 2021)

DOJ, Statement by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland (December 21, 2021)

– Thomas L. Root

Biden Says Trump Got It Right on CARES Act Home Confinees Going Back to Prison – Update for July 29, 2021

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.

BIDEN DOJ AGREES CARES ACT REQUIRES HOME CONFINEES TO RETURN TO PRISON, BUT ALL IS NOT LOST

comeback201019In a dying gasp last January, Donald Trump’s Dept of Justice Office of Legal Counsel interpreted § 12003 of the CARES Act to mean that anyone sent to home confinement during COVID-19 had to return to prison a month after the official state of emergency for the pandemic ends, according to officials.

Since taking office, President Biden’s administration has come under pressure from FAMM, other activists, and lawmakers – including Senate Judiciary Committee Richard Durbin (D-Illinois) and Sen Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) – to revoke the memo. But last week, The New York Times reported the Biden DOJ has concluded that the January memo correctly interpreted the law.

The COVID state of emergency is not expected to end this year, in part because of the rise of the Delta variant. “But the determination means that whenever it does end,” The Times said, “the department’s hands will be tied.”

The Times said several Administration officials “characterized the decision as an assessment of the best interpretation of the law, not a matter of policy preference.” But that didn’t slow the barrage of criticism.

backstab160404“We took President Biden at his word that he wanted to reduce mass incarceration, but this choice, to send thousands back to prison, would be doubling down on the worst parts of his legacy,” Holly Harris, president of Justice Action Network, said. “It’s time for President Biden to keep his promise, and keep these people home.” The Hill complained that “Biden and Attorney General Merrick Garland could have rescinded that policy.” Lauren-Brooke Eisen, director in the Brennan Center’s Justice Program, said, “No public interest is served in having this group of individuals reincarcerated.”

The Justice Action Network and the Brennan Center both noted that Biden campaigned heavily on criminal justice reform last year.

“On the campaign trail, President Biden vowed to take bold action to reduce our prison population, create a more just society, and make our communities safe. He said he believed in offering second chances,” Eisen said.

Forbes said, “The position of both administrations seems odd when the program has been such a success… Of the 20,000 on home detention (CARES Act plus those on home confinement because they were near the end of their prison term) there had only been 20 individuals returned to prison institutions as a result of violations. That’s a 99.9% success rate.”

interpretation210729I think the critics are missing the point. The fact that the Biden DOJ thinks the prior OLC legal analysis of the CARES Act is solid has no effect on what policy the Administration will follow. If anything, the criticism Biden is taking over last week’s Times story makes it more likely than not that Biden or Congress will find some means of keeping CARES Act people on home confinement.

The New York Times, Biden Legal Team Decides Inmates Must Return to Prison After Covid Emergency (July 19, 2021)

The Hill, Biden administration criticized over report that it is not extending home confinement for prisoners (July 20, 2021)

Forbes, Biden Administration Signals That Federal Inmates On Home Detention Will Return To Prison (July 20, 2021)

The Crime Report, Prisoners Freed During COVID are ‘Twisting in the Wind,’ say Reformers (July 23, 2021)

– Thomas L. Root

CARES Act Home Confinees Must Return to Prison, Trump’s DOJ Says in Parting Shot – Update for January 22, 2021

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.

A FINAL STEAMING PILE OF LEGAL EXCREMENT AS THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION LEAVES THE BUILDING

DOJOLC210122Under the March 2020 CARES Act, Congress gave the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons the authority to send inmates to home confinement at any time, despite the 6-month/10% limitation on home confinement set by 18 USC § 3624(c). The conditions set by the legislation were only two: (1) the national emergency declared because of COVID-19 had to be in effect, and (2) the Attorney General had to determine that COVID-19 was materially affecting BOP operations.

Attorney General William Barr concluded in short order that BOP operations were being affected, and that nonviolent inmates with good prison records (and US citizenship and a few other requirements) should be sent to home confinement. The BOP added its own gloss, that the inmate must have completed 50% of his or her sentence (or, for short-timers, 25% of the sentence with 18 months or less to go). By mid-April 2020, the prison-to-parlor pipeline was flowing.

snakeoil170911Since then, the BOP has trumpeted that it has sent over 18,000 inmates to home confinement. It turns out, however, that – like most BOP claims – this one is misleading, if not downright dishonest. The BOP has sent 18,112 people to home confinement in the last 10 months, but 60% of those were eligible for home confinement under 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(2) anyway, because they were within their last six months of their sentences (or 10%, if they were sentenced to under five years).

But this leaves about 7,245 people who were sent home who could not have been sent if not for the CARES Act. I know at least two sent home with more than 10 years of sentence left to serve. While that’s a long time to spend in a Barcalounger, nevertheless, there is no doubt that an inmate’s worst day on home confinement is better that his or her best day in prison.

There was a kerfuffle last fall, when a DOJ Attorney said in open court, almost as an aside, that once the pandemic ended, all of the federal inmates sent to home confinement would have to come back to prison.

At the time, FAMM president Kevin Ring said that he had communicated his concern that CARES Act inmates might be recalled to the White House. He said the Trump Administration assured him it would never happen.

Back then I said

but White House assertions (remember President Trump’s promised 3,000 clemencies?) have a way of being wrong. The risk of reincarceration seemed real enough that the House of Representatives included a provision in last May’s HEROES Act that no one “granted placement in community supervision, termination of supervision, placement on administrative supervision, or pre-trial release shall be re-incarcerated, placed on supervision or active supervision, or ordered detained pre-trial only as a result of the expiration of the national emergency relating to a communicable disease.

I generally like being right, but not this time…

Although the end of the pandemic appears to be months away (former basketball point guard and rockstar doctor Anthony Fauci said yesterday that “if the country can get over the hurdle of vaccine hesitancy and reach a 70% to 85% uptake, Americans can expect normalcy in the fall”), the Trump Administration was seemingly unable to resist breaking one final promise.

Last week, the DOJ Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion entitled “Home Confinement of Federal Prisoners After the COVID-19 Emergency,” concluding that

the CARES Act authorizes the Director of BOP to place prisoners in home confinement only during the statute’s covered emergency period and when the Attorney General finds that the emergency conditions are materially affecting BOP’s functioning. Should that period end, or should the Attorney General revoke the finding, the Bureau would be required to recall the prisoners to correctional facilities unless they are otherwise eligible for home confinement under 18 U.S.C. § 3624(c)(2). We also conclude that the general imprisonment authorities of 18 U.S.C. § 3621(a) and (b) do not supplement the CARES Act authority to authorize home confinement under the Act beyond the limits of section 3624(c)(2).

kick210122Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman said yesterday in his Sentencing Law and Policy blog that “this opinion is certain contestable, the new Biden Justice Department could reconsider it and a court might reject it, and we are surely a long ways from reaching a post-pandemic world.” Kevin Ring denounced the opinion as “one last kick in the groin from the Trump Justice Department,” calling it “is a poorly reasoned piece of cruelty that could make families worry unnecessarily.”

I consider it very unlikely that Biden’s new Attorney General, Merrick Garland, is going to rescind Barr’s finding “that the emergency conditions are materially affecting BOP’s functioning” any time soon. Although the pandemic emergency declaration expires in March, I suspect Joe is more likely to invite Donald Trump over to the White House for a drink than he is to end the emergency. There’s plenty of precedent. At the time the COVID emergency was declared, 60 national emergencies had been declared since the National Emergencies Act was enacted 45 years ago, and 31 of them (including the emergency are still in effect, having been renewed repeatedly. I figure the pandemic emergency to last for another nine months at least.

As I noted above, the House HEROES Act last May sought to plug the CARES Act hole that left home confinees in a non-permanent status. HEROES died a lonely death on January 2nd, but the new 117th Congress can fix the home confinement problem simply enough. Even if Congress does not, the President could grant conditional clemency or district courts could grant compassionate release to keep these folks on home confinement.

Even if it doesn’t, the Biden DOJ can walk back the OLC opinion (and the reasoning is shaky enough that there is plenty of room for reinterpretation) without much difficulty.

timecover2310122There is scant policy justification for returning people on home confinement to prison, unless sheer meanness is now an Administration goal. (Sheer meanness is a criterion more at home in the last Administration, the one that issued the OLC opinion, than with the new people in charge). The BOP has first determined that inmates it proposes sending to home confinement pose little risk to public safety but high risk of COVID, meaning that the CARES Act cohort includes a lot of older and sicker folk. They’re the ones, unsurprisingly who cost the BOP the most to care for. And the lower BOP prisoner population (a drop of 12.5% in a year) has eased the burden the BOP faces from staff shortages. Because the BOP has always had the discretion to return these persons to prison for misconduct, there’s no compelling public safety or cost justification for sending everyone back to prison after the pandemic is over.

In fact, there was probably no compelling need for the outgoing Administration to drop this opinion on the way out the door, unless of course the Trump appointees wanted to create as much legal vandalism for the Biden DOJ to clean up as possible.

Dept. of Justice, Memorandum Opinion for the General Counsel of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (January 15, 2021)

Sentencing Law and Policy, Notable OLC opinion on “Home Confinement of Federal Prisoners After the COVID-19 Emergency” (January 21, 2021)

Forbes, Department Of Justice Lays Plans For Federal Inmates On Home Confinement To Return To Prison (January 21, 2021)

– Thomas L. Root

After All of the Drama… Trump’s Clemency – Update for January 20, 2021

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.

TRUMP DOES SOMETHING RIGHT(?)

obtaining-clemencyAfter all of the angst since November about a flurry of pardons and commutations to be issued by President Donald John Trump (and you cannot imagine my relief at knowing I will never have to type those words again) – including speculation that he would pardon his family, all of his close friends, the Capitol rioters and even himself – Trump issued the final long-awaited clemency list in the wee hours on his last day in office (and you cannot imagine my relief at typing those words).

The media predictably fixated on the of handful of longtime allies and well-connected celebrities, including his former chief strategist, Steve Bannon, and onetime fundraiser Elliott Broidy, on the list. But that should not obscure the fact that, in virtually his last exercise of Presidential power, Trump pretty much got it right.

The White House released the list of 143 pardons and commutations at 12:50 a.m., as – according to the Wall Street Journal – Trump’s deliberations over who should receive clemency stretched late into the last full day of his term. Bannon, much like Schroedinger’s cat, flitted onto and off of the pardon list, but finally was included, short-circuiting his federal trial scheduled for May. A few rappers, politicos and Trump loyalists made the list, but the real story was that 90% of those getting pardons and commutations were rather ordinary people.

Only 18 of those on the list – 13% – were supported by the Dept of Justice Office of Pardon Attorney. The balance were by an array of political leaders, criminal justice reformers and other allies of the president.

On Tuesday, the president was still calling advisers to ask them how he should proceed on certain pardons and waffled repeatedly over whether to grant one to Mr. Bannon, a person familiar with the conversations said.

At various points on Tuesday, advisers believed Mr. Bannon—who was charged in connection to a scheme to siphon money from a crowdfunding campaign for a border wall—wouldn’t get one. The White House in a statement said Mr. Bannon “has been an important leader in the conservative movement and is known for his political acumen.”

Don’t take my word for it: here’s the list of those pardoned (their crimes forgiven) or had sentences commuted (imprisonment reduced or terminated, but the conviction remains):

White House List

trumpjohnson210120Trump has been widely criticized for using his clemency power to favor celebrities and political allies, including Michael Flynn, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone and former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio. But he was praised for commuting the sentences of some prisoners serving long sentences for nonviolent drug offenses, like 63-year old Alice Johnson, who was doing life for a 1996 crack conspiracy. Her story (she was hardly the kingpin, but paid the price for not taking a deal) caught the attention of reality-TV star Kim Kardashian, who convinced Trump to commute her sentence. The move paid off for Trump: Johnson was a vocal supporter of the President after that (who could blame her), even speaking at the Republican convention last summer. Trump rewarded that by upgrading her commutation to a pardon. At the same time, Johnson advocated for clemency for people she knew in the system.

Before last week, Trump had pardoned or commuted the sentences of 44 people convicted of federal crimes —far fewer than any other president. To be sure, Trump isn’t the only president to pardon his friends and allies during his fpardon160321inal days in office. Former President Bill Clinton was criticized for including wealthy fugitive Marc Rich in his final batch of reprieves, after Rich’s wife donated generously to Clinton’s presidential library. An investigation later concluded that the pardon was sketchy but not quite illegal.

Experts argue that the erratic clemency process should be fundamentally reimagined, either by taking it out of the president’s hands altogether or at least by moving it out of the Department of Justice. This could speed up the review process and remove review from the people whose careers were made by convicting those seeking clemency. Advocates argues that clemency should be molded into a tool for redressing the harsh sentencing practices of the early Sentencing Guidelines days since 1989. The sentences, especially for drug offense, disproportionately sent minorities to prison for long stretches.

The New York Times reported that “advocates said they were hopeful that the Biden administration would be able to revamp the clemency process, and that the pardons approved by Mr. Trump would give the next administration some cover with conservatives in the future.”

The Biden administration said it would not comment on the Trump pardons.

The Wall Street Journal, Trump Issues 73 Pardons, Including to Ex-Aide Steve Bannon (January 20, 2021)

The New York Times, Trump’s final wave of pardons includes names pushed by criminal justice reform advocates (January 21, 2021)

The Marshall Project, Trump’s Pardons Show The Process Has Always Been Broken (January 19, 2021)

– Thomas L. Root

Final Hours for Trump Clemency… and Things Are Strange – Update for January 18, 2021

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.

THINGS ARE GETTING WEIRD

weird210118Secret commutations. A phony White House pardon website. Capitol Hill rioters complaining on TV the president sent them to the insurrection, so he owes them a pardon. A promise of hundreds of clemencies. A president wonder-ing whether he can pardon himself.

For weeks, federal inmates have hoped President Trump would grant clemency to thousands of them on his way out the door. But if things looked like they were going sideways before Jan 6, they have gotten downright screwy since then.

As of this morning, the Washington Post reported “Trump is preparing to pardon or commute the sentences of more than 100 people in his final hours in office, decisions that are expected to be announced Monday or Tuesday, according to two people familiar with the discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the plans.”

The Post said Trump “has been besieged by lobbyists and lawyers for well-heeled clients who are seeking to have their criminal convictions wiped from their records, as well as by advocates for criminal justice reform, who argue that their clients were wrongly convicted or were given unfair sentences and deserve to be freed from prison.” Trump’s clemency binge has been delayed by what the Post called increasing dysfunction stemming from the Capitol riot and impeachment, but he reportedly spent part of the weekend finalizing his list.

The President has always made a big deal of his clemencies, but last Tuesday, he quietly commuted the sentence of Fred Davis Clark, whose Ponzi theft of over $171 million got him a 480-month federal sentence two years ago. Fred’s docket said the 60-year old defendant had an out date beyond 2050, but the BOP released him last Tuesday. The White House has released no official statement on the clemency.

parler210118The White House did, however, release a statement declaring a pardon notice circulating on the right-wing website Parler to be fake. The phony post, which claimed to be from the Office of Pardon Attorney, said “POTUS is seriously considering PARDONING all of the patriots in the next week and a half. If you would like a pardon, please respond below.” It then asks for the rioter’s name, city and even “what crimes you think you need to be pardoned for,” asking for them by “Tuesday” so the President can get to work on them. (Some might suggest that the very notion of the President “working” should have been the tipoff that the post was a fraud).

Some of the people who thought that vandalizing the Capitol was great fun are apparently have second thoughts now that their selfies and tweets are leading to criminal charges. Jenna Ryan, a Texas real estate broker who was arrested for joining the attack on the Capitol, has pleaded with Trump to pardon her. After surrendering to the FBI on Friday, Ryan said: “We all deserve a pardon. I’m facing a prison sentence. I think I do not deserve that.” Ryan said she had been “displaying my patriotism,” adding, “I listen to my president who told me to go to the Capitol.”

The Dept of Justice issued a statement last weekend that “the information circulating on social media claiming to be from Acting Pardon Attorney Rosalind Sargent-Burns is inauthentic and should not be taken seriously.”

In private, the president has continued to pursue which pardons he can grant in his final days in office, calling advisers to ask for suggestions. The White House is expected to release dozens of pardons in the days before he leaves office, aides say. Aides say they don’t know if some of the most controversial pardons—including for Rudy Giuliani, for the president’s children, and for the president himself—will be among them.

The New York Times reported last night that “a lucrative market for pardons is coming to a head, with some of his allies collecting fees from wealthy felons or their associates to push the White House for clemency, according to documents and interviews with more than three dozen lobbyists and lawyers.” People reported to be selling services include former AUSA Brett Tolman, Trump’s personal lawyer John M. Dowd, and Guliani.

pardonsale210118Politico reported last Friday that former White House advisor Steve Bannon – facing a federal fraud trial in May – is on the pardon list. Politico’s White House source said “two additional batches of pardons are expected — one on Friday night and one Wednesday morning before President-elect Joe Biden is sworn into office.” Of course, Friday has come and gone, and the first of the promised clemency lists did not happen. Last Monday, ABC reported that after some of Trump’s lawyers told him that if he pardons himself, he could be more vulnerable to civil lawsuits. “The president is angry,” ABC reporter Jonathan Karl said. “He has not taken that well, and I am told that he is now saying that he doesn’t want to see pardons for anybody. So the attitude seems to be: ‘If I can’t get a pardon, then nobody else should get one, either.'”

Washington Post, Trump prepares to offer clemency to more than 100 people in his final hours in office (January 18, 2021)

Law360.com, Trump Commutes Ex-Cay Clubs CEO’s Ponzi Sentence (January 14, 2021)

DOJ, Statement on Misinformation on Social Media Regarding the Office of the Pardon Attorney (January 9, 2021)

The Guardian, ‘I’m facing a prison sentence’: US Capitol rioters plead with Trump for pardons (January 16, 2021)

New York Times, Prospect of Pardons in Final Days Fuels Market to Buy Access to Trump (January 17, 2021)

Wall Street Journal, Trump Spends Final Days Focused on GOP Defectors, Senate Defense (January 16, 2021)

Politico, Trump weighing a pardon for Steve Bannon (January 15, 2021)

The Week, Trump is reportedly so angry aides are warning him against a self-pardon, he’s put all pardons ‘on hold’ (January 12, 2021)

– Thomas L. Root

Clemency Hopes Fade After Trump Capitol Riot Beatdown – Update for January 12, 2021

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.

DID LAST WEEK’S TRUMP DEBACLE KILL HOPES OF CLEMENCY PUSH?

That the insurrection on Capitol Hill is leading to an unprecedented second impeachment for President Trump has dimmed some hopes for a lot of clemency activity before January 20. Others – including Ohio State University law professor Doug Berman (writing in his Sentencing Policy and Law blog) – believed as of late last week that Trump is still “planning to issue more clemency grants before he loses the power to do so.”

trump210112

But things are changing quickly in D.C. Last night, ABC News reported that sources told it that

White House Counsel Pat Cipollone advised the president that he could face legal jeopardy for encouraging his supporters to storm the Capitol building, according to sources familiar with their discussions.

After these conversations, sources say the president grew angrier, and the entire pardon process has been described as “on hold” — meaning others who have been lobbying the president for pardons, including his personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, may not receive one.

ABC correspondent Jonathan Karl told ABC anchor David Muir that the president has been warned that self-pardon “would be seen as an admission that he did something wrong that he would need to be pardoned for. The president is angry, he has not taken that well, and I am told that he is now saying that he doesn’t want to see pardons for anybody. So the attitude seems to be: ‘If I can’t get a pardon, then nobody else should get one, either’.”

Bloomberg reported last week that Trump had prepared a sweeping list of people he’d hoped to pardon in the final days of his administration, including senior White House “people familiar with the matter,” Bloomberg said Trump intends to announce the pardons on Jan 19 – his final full day in office – and the list is currently being vetted by the White House counsel’s office. Besides Trump’s kids, in-laws and immediate staff, sources report, he is considering pardons for the husband of a Fox News personality, and rappers Lil Wayne and Kodak Black.

anderson210112Trump’s most recent contretemps have not slowed down the lobbying for high-profile pardons. Former Baywatch star Pamela Anderson, a thoughtful and incisive commentator on world affairs, is pushing to have Wikileaks founder and accused rapist Julian Assange pardoned, and conservative Florida congressman Matt Gaetz (who most recently has alleged that Antifa members in MAGA hats, not Trump patriots, stormed the Capitol) has urged that Edward Snowden should be pardoned as well.

Berman wrote, “I am hopeful, but not really optimistic, that there will be some good number of final Trumpian clemency grants for persons who are not well-connected or famous.” But now it may develop that even the Kushners, Lil Waynes and Assanges of the world may still be waiting outside the White House, MAGA hats in hand, as Marine One carries President Trump away for the last time.

trumptrain210112Even if a few of then favored get pardoned in the next 195 hours, the stats suggest there is little reason for the average prisoner to hold out optimism for Trump clemency. A recent study showed that only seven of the 94 Trump clemency grants over his term came on recommendation from the pardon attorney. Like it or not, the only way a clemency petition from someone who is not connected gets to the White House is through the Dept of Justice, not that a system leaving the prosecutor in charge of the clemency gateway is such a favored idea, either.

Berman wrote, “I hope Prez-elect Biden comes into office understanding that the best way to restore faith in the pardon power could be by using it right away to advance justice and mercy rather than parochial personal privilege.”

Lawfare, Trump’s Circumvention of the Justice Department Clemency Process (December 29, 2021)

Sentencing Law and Policy, Gearing up for Prez Trump’s coming final round of clemency grants (January 7, 2021)

ABC News, Trump warned about potential civil liability, as some aides clear out desks (January 11, 2021)

The Week, Trump is reportedly so angry aides are warning him against a self-pardon, he’s put all pardons ‘on hold’ (January 12, 2021)

Bloomberg, Trump Prepares Pardon List for Aides and Family, and Maybe Himself (January 7, 2021)

– Thomas L. Root

Presidential Clemency May Be Only Personal for Trump – Update for January 8, 2021

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.

CLEMENCY – WWJD (WHAT WILL JOE DO?)

The silliness has already started about incoming President Joe Biden. Example: I received one report last week that the new President intended to pardon one inmate a day for his first 100 days in office.

Any truth to this? Not a bit.

fuhrerbunker210108We had expected an avalanche of clemencies from the Trump Administration in its remaining 12 days, although with the Oval Office sounding more like the Fuhrerbunker. What will happen over the final 300 hours or so of the Trump Administration is anyone’s guess. Late reports say that the President is much more focused on pardoning himself than he is on anyone else. Bloomberg reported yesterday that Trump has a very short list of preemptive pardons, including his family, closer staff, two rappers, Kodak Black and Lil’ Wayne, and the ex-husband of a Fox News host.

No one should be encouraged by President Trump’s track record so far. Harvard professor Jack Goldsmith said Trump “is stingy” with his pardon power. A Pew Research Center study showed that through November 23, Trump had granted clemency to less than 0.5% of the 14,000 people who petitioned him for it through the end of the 2020 fiscal year, according to the study. As The New York Times observed, “Many who have applied have little chance of clemency under any circumstances. But those with sentences they contend are excessive and people who have shown remorse and turned their lives around in prison are hoping for mercy.”

Almost all of the people to whom Trump has granted clemency have had a personal or political connection to the White House, and it appears that only seven were recommended by the Dept of Justice Pardon Attorney, Goldsmith said. DOJ rules normally requires a person applying for clemency to wait at least five years after conviction or release from confinement, a rule that was not applied many of Trump’s grants.

clemency170206Not that skipping the Pardon Attorney’s office is necessarily a bad thing. Criminal justice reform advocates believe Trump is right to sideline the DOJ from clemency decisions. But rather than control the process for political ends, advocates say, Biden should use it to help non-violent drug offenders with questionable convictions or harsh sentences. Relying on the DOJ’s Pardon Attorney to review and make recommendations on clemency requests, they say, is bureaucratic and puts those decisions in the hands of the department that put the offenders behind bars.

Biden’s criminal justice plan says he will “broadly use his clemency power for certain non-violent and drug crimes.” In addition to removing the sole oversight of the Office of the Pardon Attorney, Biden could improve the process by creating a permanent independent advisory panel that includes criminal justice reform activists, defense attorneys and pardoned convicted offenders, alongside federal prosecutors, supporters say.

“It can be improved by not depending on the same office that fought for an individual’s conviction and draconian sentence to look back and say we need to provide relief,” one advocate said. “There is a conflict right there.”

clemencyjack161229Former Pardon Attorney Margaret Love says that the biggest problem with clemency is that too much is asked of it. There should be more statutory relief valves, like sentence reduction, to reduce sentences, as well as a means of regaining full citizenship rights for people who have been released. She argued last week, “President Trump’s abuse of his pardon power could be seen as a blessing in disguise if it provides the opportunity to wean the federal criminal justice system from its dependence upon presidential action for routine relief. Only if freed from its more workaday responsibilities can presidential pardon play the constructive role that the Framers intended.”

CNN, Trump asking aides and lawyers about self-pardon power (January 7, 2021)

Bloomberg, Trump Prepares Pardon List for Aides and Family, and Maybe Himself (January 7, 2021)

The New York Times, Outside Trump’s Inner Circle, Odds Are Long for Getting Clemency (December 28, 2020)

Bloomberg, Biden gets unlikely advice on pardons: Copy Trump, sideline DOJ (December 31, 2020)

Lawfare, Are Trump’s Pardons a Blessing in Disguise? (December 29, 2020)

– Thomas L. Root