FACT SHEETS RESPONSIVE TO SENTENCING COMMISSION'S TESTIMONY
- The Advisory Guidelines System Best Achieves the Purposes of Sentencing
- The Appellate Standard of Review is Working Just As It Should
- Racial Fairness in the Advisory Guidelines System
- Differences in Rates of
Below-Guideline Sentences Arise from Many Legitimate Sources, and Do Not Reflect
Unwarranted Disparity
- The Commission's Proposal to Require Sentencing Courts to Give "Substantial Weight" to the Guidelines Has Been Rejected by the Supreme Court as Unconstitutional
- Don't Be Fooled by the Commission's Three-Step
- There Is No "Tension between 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) and 28 U.S.C. §§ 991, et seq.' for Congress to Resolve
- The Commission's Proposal to Require Proportional Justifications Has Been Rejected by the Supreme Court, and Would Not Address the Reason Given for It
- The Commission's Proposal for "Heightened Review" of a District Court's Finding that the Guideline Itself Fails To Achieve § 3553(a)'s Objectives Is Contrary to Supreme Court Law and Would Suppress Judicial Feedback to the Commission
- A Statute Mandating a Presumption of Reasonableness for Guideline Sentences Would Renew Constitutional Doubt About the Federal Sentencing System