Today, the Supreme Court ruled that judges no longer need to abide by the letter of the manditory minimum laws. Tomorrow, they decide whether to make their decision retroactive. [AP Wire source]
In two cases presented to the Supremes, convicted drug dealers were given less harsh sentences than those mandated by Congress. The Supremes agreed in a pair of 7-2 votes (with Thomas and Alito dissenting) that judges should have the discretion to ignore the manditory minimums guidelines. Which, of course, makes the whole premise of the manditory minimum laws moot.
Did the legiscritters really think that the SCOTUS would stand around and let them cut away judicial powers like sentencing discretion?
And from the still-clueless department, we have this insightful prediction from dissenting justice, Hizzoner Alito — “Sentencing disparities will gradually increase.” As if the manditory minimum laws did anything to repair sentencing disparities.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.