United States Sentencing Commission
The United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) is an independent federal agency established by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, operating within the judicial branch of government. Its primary responsibility is to set the permissible range of sentences for federal offenses, aiming to create uniformity and reduce disparities in sentencing practices across federal courts. The commission collects and analyzes federal sentencing data, using this information to recommend changes to Congress and refine sentencing guidelines based on research findings.
The composition of the commission includes seven voting members, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, with specific restrictions on the number of judges and party affiliations represented. The commission also includes two nonvoting members and ex officio members, such as the U.S. Attorney General. Over the years, the commission has been at the center of tensions between the federal judiciary and Congress, particularly regarding legislative efforts to limit judicial discretion in sentencing. The Protect Act of 2003 exemplified this conflict, as it imposed new constraints on judges, leading to further scrutiny of their sentencing decisions. Overall, the USSC plays a crucial role in shaping federal sentencing policy and fostering dialogue about fairness and consistency in the criminal justice system.
On this Page
United States Sentencing Commission
Identification: Independent federal judicial agency responsible for developing federal sentencing guidelines and acting as a research resource for the executive and legislative branches of the federal government
Date: Established in 1984
Significance: The commission is responsible for determining federal sentencing guidelines, thereby removing discretion from federal judges.
The United States Sentencing Commission was established by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 as an independent federal agency located within the judicial branch of the government. The commission is tasked with setting the lower and upper bounds of permissible punishments for federal offenses.
The commission’s duties also include collecting and analyzing federal sentencing data and determining its effect on the federal criminal justice system. The commission uses this data to recommend federal sentencing changes to Congress. It also reviews various crime and sentencing research and refines the federal guidelines based on the findings of this research. The commission also monitors the outcomes and cases from the Court of Appeals and congressional action. In addition, the commission trains thousands of criminal justice professionals in the proper use of the federal sentencing guidelines and publishes numerous reports every year (all of which are posted on its Web site).
The makeup of the commission is mandated by federal statute. Seven voting members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate for six-year terms. Also included are two nonvoting members. One additional voting member is appointed by the commission’s chairperson. No more than three of the commissioners may be federal judges, and no more than four may belong to the same political party. In addition, the U.S. attorney general and the chairperson of the U.S. Parole Commission are ex officio members of the commission.
The commission was established in an effort to combat disparity in federal sentencing. Prior to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, federal judges were not required to use the same sentencing standards. Judges could impose sentences ranging from probation to the statutory maximum for any given offense. The Sentencing Reform Act was passed in an attempt to achieve greater fairness and certainty of punishment in the federal courts.
Since its inception, the sentencing commission has been a point of contention between the federal judiciary and the legislative branch of government. In April, 2003, the Protect Act was passed, requiring the commission to issue new limits to federal judges’ discretion in sentencing above or below the sentencing guidelines. The federal judiciary voted in the fall of 2003 to support legislation counter to the Protect Act in an effort to restore more judicial discretion. This places the commission in the middle of a political battle between the federal judiciary and some members of Congress.
The Protect Act and the more recent sentencing guideline changes open federal judges to more scrutiny in their sentencing practices, both by the public and by the appellate courts. Under the new rules, judges who depart from the sentencing guidelines face the possibility of their sentencing records being made public.
The Justice Department and Republican members of Congress tend to support the new rules, stating that they are needed in order to keep sentencing in the federal courts uniform and to keep maverick judges in line. The protests from the judiciary are not just from a few disgruntled liberal judges. Chief Justice William Rehnquist has also protested the changes, stating that they go too far in eliminating judicial discretion and flexibility. Statistics from the sentencing commission show that federal judges depart from the guidelines about 18 percent of the time, usually at the request of prosecutors, as a reward for cooperative defendants.
Bibliography
Stith, Kate, and Jose A. Cabranes. Fear of Judging: Sentencing Guidelines in the Federal Courts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.
United States Congress Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Criminal Justice Oversight. Oversight of the United States Sentencing Commission: Are the Guidelines Being Followed? Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice Oversight of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred Sixth Congress, Second Session, October 13, 2000. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2001.
Von Hirsh, Andrew, Michael Tonry, and Kay Knapp. Sentencing Commission and Its Guidelines. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1987.