- The Supreme Court has ruled that low-level drug dealers are not eligible for sentence reductions under the First Step Act.
- Around 6,000 people convicted of drug trafficking in 2021 could be eligible for reduced sentences.
- Parliament retains the power to amend the law if it disagrees with the court’s decision.
The Supreme Court ruled Friday that thousands of low-level drug traffickers are not eligible for reduced sentences under bipartisan Trump-era criminal justice reforms.
The justices ruled in the case of Mark Pulsifer, an Iowa man convicted of distributing at least 50 grams of methamphetamine, that a vague provision in the 2018 First Step Act called “and” Resolved disputes between federal courts over the meaning of words. .
The law’s so-called safety valve provisions are intended to spare low-level, nonviolent drug dealers who agree to plead guilty and cooperate with prosecutors, often facing long prison sentences.
Supreme Court rules that public officials can sue over social media comments deleted and critics blocked
Some courts have concluded that the use of this word does indeed mean “and,” while others have determined that it means “or.” Whether the defendant could have his sentence reduced depended on the outcome.
The Supreme Court will convene in Washington on February 28, 2024. The Supreme Court ruled Friday that thousands of low-level drug traffickers are not eligible for reduced sentences. (AP Photo/Jacqueline Martin, File)
“Today, we agree with the government’s position on the criminal history clause,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the majority, in a 6-3 decision that did not divide the justices along liberal-conservative lines. wrote.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a dissenting opinion, calling the First Step Act potentially “the most important criminal justice reform bill in a generation.” But under the court’s decision, “thousands more people in the federal criminal justice system will be denied the opportunity for a reduced sentence. Just a chance,” Gorsuch wrote, adding that Ketanji Brown Justices Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor also joined.
Approximately 6,000 people convicted of drug trafficking could be eligible for reduced sentences in the 2021 budget year alone, according to data compiled by the U.S. Sentencing Commission.
This provision essentially looks at the seriousness of past crimes and lists three criteria for allowing judges to waive mandatory minimum sentences. Congress wrote this provision negatively to allow judges to exercise discretion in sentencing if the defendant “doesn’t have” any of the three types of criminal history.
Before reaching a decision, the judges will decide how to qualify for the safety valve: is any one condition sufficient to disqualify, or do all three need to be disqualified? , I thought to myself.
Supreme Court unanimously rules for Trump in Colorado voting disqualification case
Pulsifer’s lawyers argued that all three conditions must be met for a longer sentence to be imposed. The government said only one condition was sufficient to meet the mandatory minimum requirements.
Kagan wrote that this language “creates a checklist of qualifications and requires defendants to meet all of its conditions.”
Two of the three conditions applied to Pulsifer. The trial court and the St. Louis-based 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that he was eligible for at least 15 years in prison. In fact, he was sentenced to 13 and a half years in prison for unrelated reasons.
Pulsifer, now 61, is not scheduled for release until 2031, according to Federal Bureau of Prisons records.
Congress could still change the law if it finds the court was wrong.
The case is Pulsifer v. United States, 22-340.
