Should Non-Violent Federal Inmates Serve Shorter Sentences? (H.R. 3713)

What is H.R. 3713?

(Updated December 14, 2017)

This bill would allow some nonviolent federal inmates to seek shorter sentences.

It would accomplish this by retroactively applying the Fair Sentencing Act to federal prisoners who were already sentenced and serving time when that law was signed in 2010. The Fair Sentencing Act narrowed longstanding disparities in drug sentencing policy. Prior to its passing, you needed to be caught with 100 times more powder cocaine than crack cocaine to earn the same mandatory minimum sentence. (Even after that reform, crack is still punished 18 times more harshly.)

This bill would would also reduce several other drug- and firearm-related mandatory minimum sentences, and these changes would retroactively apply to current inmates. Particularly of note, it would lower the current mandatory sentence of life without parole for offenders with three federal drug felonies, to a mandatory minimum of 25 years.

It also expands judges’ ability to use a "safety valve," allowing them to show leniency to some repeat drug offenders.

Argument in favor

People who commit non-violent crimes shouldn't be imprisoned for decades and have their lives disrupted. Mandatory minimum sentences are too harsh, and prevent judges from issuing a sentence that fits the circumstances of the situation.

Argument opposed

While non-violent drug crimes don't directly harm others, they promote anti-social behavior that destroys families and ruins lives through harmful substances. Mandatory minimum sentences are a harsh deterrent for would-be criminals.

Impact

The thousands of federal inmates whose sentences could be shortened, their families, the communities to which they will return, future inmates, state governments that may be influenced to amend state mandatory minimums, federal correctional staff, , and federal judges.

Cost of H.R. 3713

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

Additional Info

In Depth: The mandatory minimum sentences that this legislation chips away at were introduced by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. Sponsoring Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) introduced this bill, which he believes:

"makes commonsense changes to the front-end of the criminal justice system to ensure our federal laws effectively and appropriately punish wrongdoers, work as efficiently and fairly as possible, and do not waste taxpayer dollars. It also ensures that serious violent criminals serve the full time for their crimes in prison."

One group that’s unhappy about reducing mandatory minimums? The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. Its president, Jon Adler, said a similar bill “underestimates the impact of drugs and violence on victims,” adding that decreased mandatory minimums would encourage drug dealers to “continue their peddling of death.”

Criminal justice reform has become a hot topic in recent years, and a surprisingly bipartisan one. Just one week after this bill was introduced (unrelated to it, but easy to confuse), the Justice Department announced the upcoming release of 6,000 low-level drug offenders, as a 2014 amendment that decreased federal drug trafficking sentences kicks in retroactively.

Of Note: As mentioned above, this bill would only affect federal inmates. Drug offenders are usually arrested by state or city officers, and are therefore tried in state court. Someone arrested by a federal officer like an FBI agent is tried and sentenced in federal court, even if he/she is a low-level offender caught up in a bigger drug investigation.

Media:

• Sponsoring Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) Press Release
• House Judiciary Committee Press Release
• House Judiciary Committee Summary
  
• FLEOA (In Favor)