|
|
| Chief Justice Criticizes New Sentencing Law |
| By Join Together Online |
| Published: 01/12/2004 |
|
U.S. Supreme Court Justice William H. Rehnquist criticized an amendment tacked on to the federal Amber Alert child-protection bill that removes sentencing discretion from judges, the New York Times reported Jan. 1. The law, which was enacted last spring, targets judges who give lesser sentences than those required under the federal sentencing guidelines. It calls on the U.S. Sentencing Commission to issue new rules to "ensure that the incidence of downward departures is substantially reduced." In addition, the amendment requires the commission to maintain records of judges who depart from the sentencing guidelines and to furnish the files to the U.S. attorney general's office. The Judiciary Committees of the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate would also receive the records. In his year-end report on the federal judiciary, Rehnquist said the amendment "could appear to be an unwarranted and ill-considered effort to intimidate individual judges in the performance of their judicial duties." He also criticized the U.S. Congress for not requesting a formal evaluation from the judiciary before passing the bill. "By constitutional design, judges had an institutional commitment to the independent administration of justice and are able to see the consequences of judicial reform proposals that legislative sponsors may not be in a position to see," Rehnquist wrote in his report. The Judicial Conference of the United States, which is comprised of 27 judges who draft policy for the federal courts, has asked Congress to repeal the amendment. Congress has yet to respond or act on the request. U.S. Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said the measure was necessary because too many federal judges were deviating from the federal sentencing guidelines. "This disagreement resulted from a policy dispute between Congress and the judiciary and did not result from any breakdown in communication between the branches or a lack of opportunity for judges to express their thoughts on this issue," Sensenbrenner said. |
advertise
|
privacy policy
|
add URL
|
about us
|
terms/disclaimer
|
contact us
|
join our team
|
help
Comments:
No comments have been posted for this article.
Login to let us know what you think