first step act 2018 safety valve in stock

This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.

In December 2018, President Trump signed into law the First Step Act, which mostly involves prison reform, but also includes some sentencing reform provisions.

The key provision of the First Step Act that relates to sentencing reform concerns the “safety valve” provision of the federal drug trafficking laws.  The safety valve allows a court to sentence a person below the mandatory minimum sentence for the crime, and to reduce the person’s offense level under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines by two points.

The First Step Act increases the availability of the safety valve by making it easier to meet the first requirement—little prior criminal history.  Before the First Step Act, a person could have no more than one criminal history point. This generally means no more than one prior conviction in the last ten years for which the person received either probation or less than 60 days of prison time.

Section 402 of the First Step Act changes this.  Now, a person is eligible for the safety valve if, in addition to meeting requirements 2-5 above, the defendant does not have:

This news has been published for the above source. Kiss PR Brand Story Press Release News Desk was not involved in the creation of this content. For any service, please contact https://story.kisspr.com.

Congress passed, and President Trump signed into law, the First Step Act of 2018 in December 2018. Despite the hyperpartisan nature of politics these days, the First Step Act was a bipartisan project several years in the making. The goal of the bipartisan effort was simple but important. It aimed to reduce the number of people in federal prisons while maintaining public safety.

In general, the First Step Act includes three major components. First, it requires the Department of Justice to establish a risk and needs assessment system for the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). Second, it modifies several sentencing provisions for drug-related federal offenses. And third, it reauthorizes the Second Chance Act of 2007 to expand important prison programming. In addition to these three major components, the First Step Act includes a series of other important justice reform measures.

Under the First Step Act, the DOJ must develop a system the BOP can use to assess federal prisoners’ risk of recidivism. During the intake process, the BOP will classify each prisoner as having a minimum, low, medium, or high risk of recidivism. The BOP will also determine each prisoner’s risk of violent or serious misconduct.

Once the BOP determines a prisoner’s risk, it then must assign the prisoner to “evidence-based recidivism reduction programs” and “productive activities” to reduce their risk. The First Step Act tasks prison officials with determining both the type and amount of programming that every prisoner requires, based on the prisoner’s “criminogenic needs.”

As prisoners participate in recidivism reduction programs and productive activities, the BOP is also tasked with reassessing their recidivism risk. If that risk changes — which, assuming the BOP’s programming is worthwhile, should be inevitable — the BOP then must reassign prisoners to new programming based on their updated risk and needs.

Part of the goal behind the First Step Act was to reduce the number of prisoners in federal prisons. According to the BOP, there are more than 150,000 individuals in federal prisons today. The vast majority of that figure (nearly 125,000) are in BOP custody. The remaining amount (roughly 30,000) is split relatively evenly between private facilities and other types of detention centers.

To reduce those numbers, the First Step Act incentivizes participation in recidivism reduction programs. Most notably, prisoners who successfully complete the programming can earn up to 10 days of time credits for every 30 days of program participation. Additionally, minimum- and low-risk prisoners whose assessed risk of recidivism doesn’t increase can earn another five days of time creditors for every 30 days of participation. Altogether, prisoners can earn up to 15 days of time credits for every 30 days of program participation.

Time credits aren’t available for all prisoners, however. In general, prisoners serving sentences for violent crimes, terrorism, espionage, human trafficking, sexual assault and exploitation, repeat felony in possession of a firearm, fraud, or high-level drug offenses can’t earn these time credits. Likewise, prisoners subject to a final order of removal by a U.S. Immigration Court also aren’t eligible. These prisons may be, however, eligible for other incentives under the First Step Act.

The First Step Act also incentivizes prisoner participation with other rewards. These include additional phone privileges, including an extra 30 minutes per day. They also include additional visitation time and the possibility of a transfer to a facility closer to home. Other examples include increased spending limits and product offerings for commissary as well as greater email access. Prisoners could also earn placement in preferred housing units. Finally, the act even allows for other rewards that prisoners propose — so long as the BOP approves.

First, the First Step Act reduced mandatory minimums for some drug-trafficking offenses where the offender had at least one prior conviction. If the offender has only one prior conviction, the First Step Act reduced the mandatory minimum from 20 years to 15 years. If the offender has two or more prior convictions, the First Step Act reduced it from a life sentence to a 25-year mandatory minimum.

The First Step Act also changed the criteria that courts use to determine whether a prior conviction triggers these mandatory minimum sentence rules. Rather than simply requiring a felony drug offense, the First Step Act requires that a prior conviction constitute a “serious drug felony” or “serious violent felony.” Serious drug felonies must carry a maximum of 10 years or more, and the individual must have served more than 12 months on that conviction within the past 15 years.

The First Step Act also expands the “safety valve” provision that previously applied to offenders without a criminal record. This safety valve provision allows judges to sentence low-level, nonviolent drug offenders to a term of imprisonment that is less than the mandatory minimum that would ordinarily apply. Now, under the act, that safety valve provision applies to drug offenders with minor criminal records as well.

Before the First Step Act, someone convicted of two or more drug-trafficking offenses involving a firearm in the same case could be subject to the “stacking” provision. This means that they would face a 25-year minimum for two or more convictions. This was true even though those convictions were the product of charges in the same case. Under the First Step Act, however, the “stacking” provision applies only when the individual has a priorconviction.

The First Step Act retroactively applies the 2010 Fair Sentencing Act. Now, prisoners serving sentences for crimes involving crack cocaine can petition to have their sentences reduced. The Fair Sentencing Act’s provisions specifically addressed the disparity in sentences for powder and crack cocaine.

Originally, someone convicted of possessing 50 grams of crack cocaine faced the same 10-year minimum that someone convicted of possessing 5,000 grams of powder cocaine did. The same disparity existed with five-year minimums, too: Five grams of crack cocaine got you the same sentence as 500 grams of powder cocaine. With the Fair Sentencing Act, the crack-to-power ratio went from five to 500 (or 50 to 5,000) to 28 to 500 (or 280 to 5,000).

Lastly, the First Step Act creates the Second Chance Reauthorization Act of 2018. That provision reauthorizes a number of grant programs first authorized by the Second Chance Act of 2007. Examples of reauthorized programs include the following:

Treatment, grant programming and research provided for under the Second Chance Reauthorization Act of 2018 aims to improve the quality of life for prisoners both in and out of prison. Whether the act achieves this goal is a subjective question. But the act also includes provisions requiring the National Institute of Justice to evaluate its effectiveness within five years.

The First Step Act also contains several other provisions aimed at reforming the criminal justice system as well. Perhaps the best example is the act’s amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b). Now, prisoners can now earn up to 54 days of good time credit for every year of their sentence imposed. Under the law’s previous version, good time credit was based on time served.

The First Step Act undoubtedly includes many positive measures aimed at reforming the criminal justice and prison systems. But the provisions in the bill are only an improvement to the extent that they impact BOP’s practices. And, so far, the First Step Act’s major reforms are getting mixed reviews at best.

Perhaps the most significant criticism so far centers on the First Step Act’s provision providing for 15 days of time credits for every 30 days of programming. On the surface, the 30-15 provision makes it sound relatively straightforward to earn time credits. Your mind automatically breaks it down into months: do 12 months of programming, and you get out six months early. Undoubtedly it won’t be that simple, we think, but it’s something to aim for.

For example, how many “hours” constitutes a day under the First Step Act? If it’s eight hours per day, you’d complete one day of programming once you completed the eight-week “Assert Yourself for Female Offenders.” Only 29 more programs just like it, and you’d have 15 days worth of “time credits.” If you were only allowed to participate in one program at a time — something else that isn’t perfectly clear — it would take you 232 weeks to earn 15 days with one-hour-a-week programs like “Assert Yourself for Female Offenders.”

And this is just one potential issue with the First Step Act as implemented by the Bureau of Prisons. Other problems include how the Bureau has applied the law’s exclusions with respect to some prisoners. Some advocates contend that the Bureau has applied the exclusions too broadly. In doing so, the BOP disqualifies a much larger portion of the prison population than ever intended. Advocates also fear that the availability of programming is much spottier than the law requires.

Critics also worry about the impact the First Step Act might have on racial, ethnic and religious minorities. It should be emphasized that even critics of the First Step Act recognize the need for significant reform measures to the criminal justice system. And they even praise some of the fundamental aspects of the First Step Act itself. But that doesn’t take away their concerns.

As indicated above, the First Step Act implements risk assessment tools. Throughout U.S. history, discretionary assessment tools used in the criminal justice system have routinely relied on racially-biased factors. The fear is that the risk assessment tools for the 30-15 program won’t be any different. Rather than using “tools” like algorithms, critics recommend systems that required individualized assessments. These present a better chance of accurately determining one’s recidivism risk.

Critics also point out that the First Step Act penalizes prisoners based on their immigration status. Several provisions in the act expressly exclude non-citizen immigrants, including ones that help prisoners earn an early release. Yet immigration-related cases make up more than 50% of all federal criminal prosecutions.

The First Step Act also appears to encourage participation in religious programming in prison. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits Congress from making “law[s] respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….” Yet the First Step Act expressly includes “faith-based classes or services” in the definition of evidence-based recidivism reduction program. This means that participation in faith-based classes or services can earn prisoners an early release. In light of the inadequate availability of programming, prisoners may feel pressured to participate in programming for faiths they don’t believe in just to earn time credits. This pressure is both constitutionally problematic and simply immoral.

The First Step Act of 2018 is significant. It marks one of the most notable steps at reforming the criminal justice system in recent memory. But the act itself is — as its name suggests — just a first step. And even that first step was far from perfect. Moving forward, it is incumbent on lawmakers to amend the First Step Act. They need to address the problems laid out above as well as many, many more. But it’s also incumbent on them to take additional steps, too. But, as Senator Cory Book (D-NJ) likes to say, lawmakers must be able to “walk and chew bubble gum at the same time.”

On December 21, 2018, President Trump signed into law the First Step Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-391). The act was the culmination of several years of congressional debate about what Congress might do to reduce the size of the federal prison population while also creating mechanisms to maintain public safety.

This report provides an overview of the provisions of the First Step Act. The act has three major components: (1) correctional reform via the establishment of a risk and needs assessment system at BOP, (2) sentencing reform that involved changes to penalties for some federal offenses, and (3) the reauthorization of the Second Chance Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-199). The act also contains a series of other criminal justice-related provisions that include, for example, changes to the way good time credits are calculated for federal prisoners, prohibiting the use of restraints on pregnant inmates, expanding the market for products made by the Federal Prison Industries, and requiring BOP to aid prisoners with obtaining identification before they are released.

The correctional reform component of the First Step Act involves the development and implementation of a risk and needs assessment system (system) at BOP.

The act requires DOJ to develop the system to be used by BOP to assess the risk of recidivism of federal prisoners and assign prisoners to evidence-based recidivism reduction programsdetermine the risk of recidivism of each prisoner during the intake process and classify each prisoner as having a minimum, low, medium, or high risk;

reassign prisoners to appropriate recidivism reduction programs or productive activities based on their reassessed risk of recidivism to ensure that all prisoners have an opportunity to reduce their risk classification, that the programs address prisoners" criminogenic needs, and that all prisoners are able to successfully participate in such programs;

conduct ongoing research and data analysis on (1) evidence-based recidivism reduction programs related to the use of risk and needs assessment, (2) the most effective and efficient uses of such programs, (3) which programs are the most effective at reducing recidivism, and the type, amount, and intensity of programming that most effectively reduces the risk of recidivism, and (4) products purchased by federal agencies that are manufactured overseas and could be manufactured by prisoners participating in a prison work program without reducing job opportunities for other workers in the United States;

annually review and validate the risk and needs assessment system, including an evaluation to ensure that assessments are based on dynamic risk factors (i.e., risk factors that can change); validate any tools that the system uses; and evaluate the recidivism rates among similarly classified prisoners to identify any unwarranted disparities, including disparities in such rates among similarly classified prisoners of different demographic groups, and make any changes to the system necessary to address any that are identified; and

Under the act, the system is required to provide guidance on the type, amount, and intensity of recidivism reduction programming and productive activities to which each prisoner is assigned, including information on which programs prisoners should participate in based on their criminogenic needs and the ways that BOP can tailor programs to the specific criminogenic needs of each prisoner to reduce their risk of recidivism. The system is also required to provide guidance on how to group, to the extent practicable, prisoners with similar risk levels together in recidivism reduction programming and housing assignments.

The act requires BOP, when developing the system, to take steps to screen prisoners for dyslexia and to provide programs to treat prisoners who have it.

Within 180 days of DOJ releasing the system, BOP is required tocomplete the initial risk and needs assessment for each prisoner (including for prisoners who were incarcerated before the enactment of the First Step Act);

begin to expand the recidivism reduction programs and productive activities available at BOP facilities and add any new recidivism reduction programs and productive activities necessary to effectively implement the system; and

BOP is required to expand recidivism reduction programming and productive activities capacity so that all prisoners have an opportunity to participate in risk reduction programs within two years of BOP completing initial risk and needs assessments for all prisoners. During the two-year period when BOP is expanding recidivism reduction programs and productive activities, prisoners who are nearing their release date are given priority for placement in such programs.

BOP is required to provide all prisoners with the opportunity to participate in recidivism reduction programs that address their criminogenic needs or productive activities throughout their term of incarceration. High- and medium-risk prisoners are to have priority for placement in recidivism reduction programs, while the program focus for low-risk prisoners is on participation in productive activities.

Prisoners who successfully participate in recidivism reduction programming or productive activities are required to be reassessed not less than annually, and high- and medium-risk prisoners who have less than five years remaining until their projected release date are required to have more frequent reassessments. If the reassessment shows that a prisoner"s risk of recidivating or specific needs have changed, BOP is required to reassign the prisoner to recidivism reduction programs or productive activities consistent with those changes.

The First Step Act requires the use of incentives and rewards for prisoners to participate in recidivism reduction programs, including the following:additional phone privileges, and if available, video conferencing privileges, of up to 30 minutes a day, and up to 510 minutes a month;

Under the act, prisoners who successfully complete recidivism reduction programming are eligible to earn up to 10 days of time credits for every 30 days of program participation. Minimum and low-risk prisoners who successfully completed recidivism reduction or productive activities and whose assessed risk of recidivism has not increased over two consecutive assessments are eligible to earn up to an additional five days of time credits for every 30 days of successful participation. However, prisoners serving a sentence for a conviction of any one of multiple enumerated offenses are ineligible to earn additional time credits regardless of risk level, though these prisoners are eligible to earn the other incentives and rewards for program participation outlined above. Offenses that make prisoners ineligible to earn additional time credits can generally be categorized as violent, terrorism, espionage, human trafficking, sex and sexual exploitation, repeat felon in possession of firearm, certain fraud, or high-level drug offenses. Prisoners who are subject to a final order of removal under immigration law are ineligible for additional earned time credits provided by the First Step Act.

Prisoners cannot retroactively earn time credits for programs they completed prior to the enactment of the First Step Act, and they cannot earn time credits for programs completed while detained pending adjudication of their cases.

The act requires BOP to develop guidelines for reducing time credits prisoners earned under the system for violating institutional rules or the rules of recidivism reduction programs and productive activities. The guidelines must also include a description of a process for prisoners to earn back any time credits they lost due to misconduct.

the prisoner has been determined to be a minimum or low risk to recidivate based on his/her last two assessments, or has had a petition to be transferred to prerelease custody approved by the warden, after the warden"s determination that the prisoner (1) would not be a danger to society if transferred to prerelease custody, (2) has made a good faith effort to lower his/her recidivism risk through participation in recidivism reduction programs or productive activities, and (3) is unlikely to recidivate.

Prisoners who are placed on prerelease custody on home confinement are subject to a series of conditions. Per the act, prisoners on home confinement are required to have 24-hour electronic monitoring that enables the identification of their location and the time, and must remain in their residences, except togo to work or participate in job-seeking activities,

When monitoring adherence to the conditions of prerelease custody, BOP is required, to the extent practicable, to reduce the restrictiveness of those conditions for prisoners who demonstrate continued compliance with their conditions.

Two years after the enactment of the First Step Act, and each year thereafter for the next five years, DOJ is required to submit a report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees and the House and Senate Subcommittees on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (CJS) Appropriations that includes information onthe types and effectiveness of recidivism reduction programs and productive activities provided by BOP, including the capacity of each program and activity at each prison and any gaps or shortages in capacity of such programs and activities;

the recidivism rates of prisoners released from federal prison, based on the following criteria: (1) the primary offense of conviction; (2) the length of the sentence imposed and served; (3) the facility or facilities in which the prisoner"s sentence was served; (4) the type of recidivism reduction programming; (5) prisoners" assessed and reassessed risk of recidivism; and (6) the type of productive activities;

any budgetary savings that have resulted from the implementation of the act, and a strategy for investing those savings in other federal, state, and local law enforcement activities and expanding recidivism reduction programs and productive activities at BOP facilities.

Within two years of the enactment of the First Step Act, the Independent Review Committee is required to submit a report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees and the House and Senate CJS Appropriations Subcommittees that includesa list of all offenses that make prisoners ineligible for earned time credits under the system, and the number of prisoners excluded for each offense by age, race, and sex;

the number of prisoners ineligible for earned time credits under the system who did not participate in recidivism reduction programming or productive activities by age, race, and sex; and

whether BOP is offering the type, amount, and intensity of recidivism reduction programs and productive activities that allow prisoners to earn the maximum amount of additional time credits for which they are eligible;

The First Step Act authorizes $75 million per fiscal year from FY2019 to FY2023 for DOJ to establish and implement the system; 80% of this funding is to be directed to BOP for implementation.

The First Step Act makes several changes to federal sentencing law. The act reduced the mandatory minimum sentences for certain drug offenses, expanded the scope of the safety valve, eliminated the stacking provision, and made the provisions of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-220) retroactive.

The act adjusts the mandatory minimum sentences for certain drug traffickers with prior drug convictions. The act reduces the 20-year mandatory minimum (applicable where the offender has one prior qualifying conviction) to a 15-year mandatory minimum and reduces the life sentence mandatory minimum (applicable where the offender has two or more prior qualifying convictions) to a 25-year mandatory minimum.serious drug felonyserious violent felonyfelony drug offense.

The act makes drug offenders with minor criminal records eligible for the safety valve provision, which previously applied only to offenders with virtually spotless criminal records.

The act eliminates stacking by providing that the 25-year mandatory minimum for a "second or subsequent" conviction for use of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime or a violent crime applies only where the offender has a prior conviction for use of a firearm that is already final.

The First Step Act authorizes courts to apply retroactively the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, which increased the threshold quantities of crack cocaine sufficient to trigger mandatory minimum sentences, by resentencing qualified prisoners as if the Fair Sentencing Act had been in effect at the time of their offenses.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act of 2018 (Title V of the First Step Act) reauthorizes many of the grant programs that were initially authorized by the Second Chance Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-199). The Second Chance Reauthorization Act also reauthorized a BOP pilot program to provide early release to elderly prisoners.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act amends the authorization for the Adult and Juvenile State and Local Offender Demonstration Program so grants can be awarded to states, local governments, territories, or Indian tribes, or any combination thereof, in partnership with interested persons (including federal correctional officials), service providers, and nonprofit organizations, for the strategic planning and implementation of reentry programs. The Second Chance Reauthorization Act amended the authorization for this program to allow grants to be used for reentry courts and promoting employment opportunities consistent with a transitional jobs strategy in addition to the purposes for which grants could already be awarded.

The act also amended the Second Chance Act authorizing legislation for the program to allow DOJ to award both planning and implementation grants. DOJ is required to develop a procedure to allow applicants to submit a single grant application when applying for both planning and implementation grants.

providing a plan for analyzing the barriers (e.g., statutory, regulatory, rules-based, or practice-based) to reentry for ex-offenders in the applicants" communities;

Under the amended program, applicants for implementation grants would be required to develop a strategic reentry plan that contains measurable three-year performance outcomes. Applicants would be required to develop a feasible goal for reducing recidivism using baseline data collected through the partnership with the local evaluator. Applicants are required to use, to the extent practicable, random assignment and controlled studies, or rigorous quasi-experimental studies with matched comparison groups, to determine the effectiveness of the program.

As authorized by the Second Chance Act, grantees under the Adult and Juvenile State and Local Offender Demonstration program are required to submit annual reports to DOJ that identify the specific progress made toward achieving their strategic performance outcomes, which they are required to submit as a part of their reentry strategic plans. Data on performance measures only need to be submitted by grantees that receive an implementation grant. The act repeals some performance outcomes (i.e., increased housing opportunities, reduction in substance abuse, and increased participation in substance abuse and mental health services) and adds the following outcomes:increased number of staff trained to administer reentry services;

The act allows applicants for implementation grants to include a cost-benefit analysis as a performance measure under their required reentry strategic plan.

The Second Chance Act authorized DOJ to make grants to states, local governments, and Indian tribes to develop, implement, and expand the use of family-based substance abuse treatment programs as an alternative to incarceration for parents who were convicted of nonviolent drug offenses and to provide prison-based family treatment programs for incarcerated parents of minor children.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act amends the authorization for the program to allow grants to be awarded to nonprofit organizations and requires DOJ to give priority consideration to nonprofit organizations that demonstrate a relationship with state and local criminal justice agencies, including the judiciary and prosecutorial agencies or local correctional agencies.

The Second Chance Act authorized a grant program to evaluate and improve academic and vocational education in prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities. This program authorizes DOJ to make grants to states, units of local government, territories, Indian tribes, and other public and private entities to identify and implement best practices related to the provision of academic and vocational education in prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities. Grantees are required to submit reports within 90 days of the end of the final fiscal year of a grant detailing the progress they have made, and to allow DOJ to evaluate improved academic and vocational education methods carried out with grants provided under this program.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act amends the authorizing legislation for this program to require DOJ to identify and publish best practices relating to academic and vocational education for offenders in prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities. In identifying best practices, the evaluations conducted under this program must be considered.

The Second Chance Act authorized DOJ to make grants to states, units of local government, territories, and Indian tribes to provide technology career training for prisoners. Grants could be awarded for programs that establish technology careers training programs for inmates in a prison, jail, or juvenile detention facility.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act expanded the scope of the program to allow grant funds to be used to provide any career training to those who are soon to be released and during transition and reentry into the community. The act makes nonprofit organizations an eligible applicant under the program. Under the legislation, grants funds could be used to provide subsidized employment if it is a part of a career training program. The act also requires DOJ to give priority consideration to any application for a grant thatprovides an assessment of local demand for employees in the geographic area to which offenders are likely to return,

The Second Chance Act authorized DOJ to make grants to states, units of local governments, territories, and Indian tribes in order to improve drug treatment programs in prisons and reduce the post-prison use of alcohol and other drugs by long-term users under correctional supervision. Grants may be used to continue or improve existing drug treatment programs, develop and implement programs for long-term users, provide addiction recovery support services, or establish medication assisted treatment (MAT) services as part of any drug treatment program offered to prisoners.

The Second Chance Act authorized DOJ to make grants to nonprofit organizations and Indian tribes to provide mentoring and other transitional services for offenders being released into the community. Funds could be used for mentoring programs in prisons or jails and during reentry, programs providing transition services during reentry, and programs providing training for mentors on the criminal justice system and victims issues.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act amends the authorization for the program to pivot the focus toward providing community-based transitional services to former inmates returning to the community. Reflecting the change in focus, the reauthorization changed the name of the program to "Community-based Mentoring and Transitional Services Grants to Nonprofit Organizations." The act specifies the transitional services that can be provided to returning inmates under the program, including educational, literacy, vocational, and the transitional jobs strategy; substance abuse treatment and services; coordinated supervision and services for offenders, including physical health care and comprehensive housing and mental health care; family services; and validated assessment tools to assess the risk factors of returning prisoners.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act reauthorized and expanded the scope of a pilot program initially authorized under the Second Chance Act that allowed BOP to place certain elderly nonviolent offenders on home confinement to serve the remainder of their sentences. BOP was authorized to conduct this pilot program at one facility for FY2009 and FY2010. An offender eligible to be released through the program had to meet the following requirements:at least 65 years old;

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act reestablishes the pilot program and allows BOP to operate it at multiple facilities from FY2019 to FY2023. The act also modifies the eligibility criteria for elderly offenders so that any offenders who are at least 60 year old and have served two-thirds of their sentences can be placed on home confinement.

The act also expands the program so that terminally ill offenders can be placed on home confinement. Eligibility criteria for home confinement for terminally ill offenders under the pilot program is the same as that for elderly offenders, except that terminally ill offenders of any age and who have served any portion of their sentences, even life sentences, are eligible for home confinement. Terminally ill prisoners are those who are deemed by a BOP medical doctor to need care at a nursing home, intermediate care facility, or assisted living facility, or those who have been diagnosed with a terminal illness.

The Second Chance Act authorized appropriations for a series of reentry-related research projects, including the following:a study by the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) identifying the number and characteristics of children with incarcerated parents and their likelihood of engaging in criminal activity;

studies by BJS to determine the characteristics of individuals who return to prison, jail, or a juvenile facility (including which individuals pose the highest risk to the community);

collecting data and developing best practices concerning the communication and coordination between state corrections and child welfare agencies, to ensure the safety and support of children of incarcerated parents.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act reauthorizes appropriations for these research projects at $5 million for each fiscal year from FY2019 to FY2023.

Within five years of the enactment of the Second Chance Reauthorization Act, NIJ is required to evaluate grants used by DOJ to support reentry and recidivism reduction programs at the state, local, tribal, and federal levels. Specifically, NIJ is required to evaluate the following:whether the programs are cost-effective, including the extent to which the programs improved reentry outcomes;

NIJ is required to identify outcome measures, including employment, housing, education, and public safety, that are the goals of programs authorized by the Second Chance Act and metrics for measuring whether those programs achieved the intended results. As a condition of receiving funding under programs authorized by the Second Chance Act, grantees are required to collect and report data to DOJ related to those metrics.

NIJ is required to make data collected during evaluations of Second Chance Act programs publicly available in a manner that protects the confidentiality of program participants and is consistent with applicable law. NIJ is also required to make the final evaluation reports publicly available.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act requires BOP to develop policies for wardens of prisons and community-based facilities to enter into recidivism-reducing partnerships with nonprofit and other private organizations, including faith-based and community-based organizations to deliver recidivism reduction programming.

The Second Chance Reauthorization Act repealed the authorization for the State, Tribal, and Local Reentry Courts program (Section 111 of the Second Chance Act), the Responsible Reintegration of Offenders program (Section 212), and the Study on the Effectiveness of Depot Naltrexone for Heroin Addiction program (Section 244).

In addition to correctional and sentencing reform and reauthorizing the Second Chance Act, the First Step Act contained a series of other criminal justice-related provisions.

The act amended 18 U.S.C. Section 3624(b) so that federal prisoners can earn up to 54 days of good time credit for every year of their imposed sentence rather than for every year of their sentenced served. Prior to the amendment, BOP interpreted the good time credit provision in Section 3624(b) to mean that prisoners are eligible to earn 54 days of good time credit for every year they serve. For example, this means that an offender who was sentenced to 10 years in prison and earned the maximum good time credits each year could be released after serving eight years and 260 days, having earned 54 days of good time credit for each year of the sentence served, but in effect, only 47 days of good time credit for every year of the imposed sentence.

The act requires BOP to provide a secure storage area outside of the secure perimeter of a correctional institution for qualified law enforcement officers employed by BOP to store firearms or allow this class of employees to store firearms in their personal vehicles in lockboxes approved by BOP. The act also requires BOP, notwithstanding any other provision of law, to allow these same employees to carry concealed firearms on prison grounds but outside of the secure perimeter of the correctional institution.

The act prohibits BOP or the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) from using restraints on pregnant inmates in their custody. The prohibition on the use of restraints begins on the date that pregnancy is confirmed by a healthcare professional. The restriction ends when the inmate completes postpartum recovery.

The prohibition on the use of restraints does not apply if the inmate is determined to be an immediate and credible flight risk or poses an immediate and serious threat of harm to herself or others that cannot be reasonably prevented by other means, or a healthcare professional determines that the use of restraints is appropriate for the medical safety of the inmate. Only the least restrictive restraints necessary to prevent escape or harm can be used. The exception to the use of restraints does not permit BOP or USMS to use them around the ankles, legs, or waist of an inmate; restrain an inmate"s hands behind her back; use four-point restraints; or attach an inmate to another inmate. Upon the request of a healthcare professional, correctional officials or deputy marshals shall refrain from using restraints on an inmate or shall remove restraints used on an inmate.

If restraints are used on a pregnant inmate, the correctional official or deputy marshal who used the restraints is required to submit a report within 30 days to BOP or USMS, and the healthcare provider responsible for the inmate"s health and safety, that describes the facts and circumstances surrounding the use of the restraints, including the reason(s) for using them; the details of their use, including the type of restraint and length of time they were used; and any observable physical effects on the prisoner.

The act amends 18 U.S.C. Section 3621(b) to require BOP to house prisoners in facilities as close to their primary residence as possible, and to the extent practicable, within 500 driving miles, subject to a series of considerations. When making decisions about where to house a prisoner, BOP must consider bedspace availability, the prisoner"s security designation, the prisoner"s programmatic needs, the prisoner"s mental and medical health needs, any request made by the prisoner related to faith-based needs, recommendations of the sentencing court, and other security concerns. BOP is also required, subject to these considerations and a prisoner"s preference for staying at his/her current facility or being transferred, to transfer a prisoner to a facility closer to his/her primary residence even if the prisoner is currently housed at a facility within 500 driving miles.

The act amends 18 U.S.C. Section 3624(c)(2) to require BOP, to the extent practicable, to place prisoners with lower risk levels and lower needs on home confinement for the maximum amount of time permitted under this paragraph. Under Section 3624(c)(2), BOP is authorized to place prisoners in prerelease custody on home confinement for 10% of the term of imprisonment or six months, whichever is shorter.

The act amends 18 U.S.C. Section 3582(c) regarding when a court can modify a term of imprisonment once it is imposed. Under Section 3582(c)(1)(A), a court, upon a petition from BOP, can reduce a prisoner"s sentence and impose a term of probation or supervised release, with or without conditions, equal to the amount of time remaining on the prisoner"s sentence if the court finds that "extraordinary and compelling reasons warrant such a reduction," or the prisoner is at least 70 years of age, the prisoner has served at least 30 years of his/her sentence, and a determination has been made by BOP that the prisoner is not a danger to the safety of any other person or the community. This is sometimes referred to as compassionate release. The amendments made by the act allow the court to reduce a prisoner"s sentence under Section 3582(c)(1)(A) upon a petition from BOP or the prisoner if the prisoner has fully exhausted all administrative rights to appeal a failure by BOP to bring a motion on the prisoner"s behalf or upon a lapse of 30 days from the receipt of such a request by the warden of the prisoner"s facility, whichever is earlier.

The act also requires BOP within 72 hours of a prisoner being diagnosed with a terminal illness to notify the prisoner"s attorney, partner, and family about the diagnosis and inform them of their option to submit a petition for compassionate release on the prisoner"s behalf. Within seven days, BOP is required to provide the prisoner"s partner and family with an opportunity to visit. BOP is also required to provide assistance to the prisoner with drafting and submitting a petition for compassionate release if such assistance is requested by the prisoner or the prisoner"s attorney, partner, or family. BOP is required to process requests for compassionate release within 14 days.

The act also requires BOP to submit annual reports to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees that provides data on how BOP is processing applications for compassionate release.

The act amends the authorization for the federal prisoner reentry initiative (34 U.S.C. Section 60541(b)) to require BOP to assist prisoners and offenders who were sentenced to a period of community confinement

The act also amends 18 U.S.C. Section 4042(a) to require BOP to establish prerelease planning procedures to help prisoners apply for federal and state benefits and obtain identification, including a social security card, driver"s license or other official photo identification, and birth certificate. BOP is required to help prisoners secure these benefits, subject to any limitations in law, prior to being released. The act also amends Section 4042(a) to require prerelease planning to include any individuals who only served a sentence of community confinement.

The act authorizes the Federal Prison Industries (FPI, also known by its trade name, UNICOR) to sell products to public entities for use in correctional facilities, disaster relief, or emergency response; to the District of Columbia government; and to nonprofit organizations.

The act also requires BOP to set aside 15% of the wages paid to prisoners with FPI work assignments in a fund that will be payable to the prisoner upon release to aid with the cost of transitioning back into the community.

The act requires BOP to provide training to correctional officers and other BOP employees (including correctional officers and employees of facilities that contract with BOP to house prisoners) on how to de-escalate encounters between a law enforcement officer or an officer or employee of BOP and a civilian or a prisoner, and how to identify and appropriately respond to incidents that involve people with mental illness or other cognitive deficits.

Within 90 days of enactment of the act, BOP is required to submit a report to the House and Senate Judiciary and Appropriations Committees that assesses the availability of, and the capacity of BOP to provide, evidence-based treatment to prisoners with opioid and heroin abuse problems, including MAT, where appropriate. As a part of the report, BOP is required to provide a plan to expand access to evidence-based treatment for prisoners with heroin and opioid abuse problems, including MAT, where appropriate. After submitting the report, BOP is required to execute the plan it outlines in the report.

The act places a similar requirement on the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC) regarding evidence-based treatment for opioid and heroin abuse for prisoners serving a term of supervised release. AOUSC has 120 days after enactment to submit its report to the House and Senate Judiciary and Appropriations Committees.

The act requires BOP to establish two pilot programs that are to run for five years in at least 20 facilities. The first is a mentoring program that is to pair youth with volunteer mentors from faith-based or community organizations.

The act requires BJS to expand data collected under its National Prisoner Statistics program to include 26 new data elements related to federal prisoners. Some of the data the act requires BJS to collect include the following:the number of prisoners who are veterans;

the number of prisoners enrolled in recidivism reduction programs and productive activities at each BOP facility, broken down by risk level and by program, and the number of those enrolled prisoners who successfully completed each program.

Starting one year after the enactment of the act, BJS is required to submit an annual report to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees for a period of seven years that contains the data specified in the act.

The act requires BOP to provide tampons and sanitary napkins that meet industry standards to prisoners for free and in a quantity that meets the healthcare needs of each prisoner.

The act requires the Attorney General to coordinate with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Secretaries of Labor, Education, Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs, and Agriculture, and the heads of other relevant federal agencies, as well as interested persons, service providers, nonprofit organizations, and state, tribal, and local governments, on federal reentry policies, programs, and activities, with an emphasis on evidence-based practices and the elimination of duplication of services.

The Attorney General, in consultation with the secretaries specified in the act, is required to submit a report to Congress within two years of the enactment of the act that summarizes the achievements of the coordination, and includes recommendations for Congress on how to further reduce barriers to successful reentry.

The act prohibits juvenile facilities from using room confinement for discipline, punishment, retaliation, or any reason other than as a temporary response to a covered juvenile"s behavior that poses a serious and immediate risk of physical harm to any individual.

Juvenile facilities are required to try to use less restrictive techniques, such as talking with the juvenile in an attempt to de-escalate the situation or allowing a mental health professional to talk to the juvenile, before placing the juvenile in room confinement. If the less restrictive techniques do not work and the juvenile is placed in room confinement, the staff of the juvenile facility is required to tell the juvenile why he/she is being placed in room confinement. Staff are also required to inform the juvenile that he/she will be released from room confinement as soon as he/she regains self-control and no longer poses a threat of physical harm to himself/herself or others. If a juvenile who poses a threat of harm to others does not sufficiently regain self-control, staff must inform the juvenile that he/she will be released within three hours of being placed in room confinement, or in the case of a juvenile who poses a threat of harm to himself/herself, that he/she will be released within 30 minutes of being placed in room confinement. If after the maximum period of confinement allowed the juvenile continues to pose a threat of physical harm to himself/herself or others, the juvenile is to be transferred to another juvenile facility or another location in the current facility where services can be provided to him/her. If a qualified mental health professional believes that the level of crisis services available to the juvenile are not adequate, the staff at the juvenile facility is to transfer the juvenile to a facility that can provide adequate services. The act prohibits juvenile facilities from using consecutive periods of room confinement on juveniles.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The United States Sentencing Commission made a collective decision to approve its policy priorities for the 2022-2023 amendment year — the top of their list is the First Step Act of 2018, the so-called “compassionate release.”

The First Step Act provides eligible inmates an opportunity to file for compassionate release, under the notion they earn 10 to 15 days of time credit for every 30 days they participate in a program that reduces recidivism. However, this statute has not been added in the guidelines.

As a result, the U.S. Sentencing Commission plans to revise amendments to section 5C1.2 to acknowledge the updated statutory criteria and consider modifications to the 2-level reduction in the drug trafficking guideline that is tied to the statutory safety valve.

In addition, the commission also started to implement criminal provisions contained in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which includes increased penalties for certain firearms offenses, and other legislative enactments that require Commission action.

“We look forward to a careful and detailed examination of these issues and our continued interaction with the public to ensure the federal sentencing guidelines properly reflect current law and promote uniformity in sentencing,” promised Reeves.

This detailed examination includes addressing key components of the guidelines of the First Step Act. To tackle these conflicts and other issues involving criminal history, there will be projects and programs created to reap benefits of these alternatives-to-incarceration programs.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The United States Sentencing Commission today unanimously approved its Among its top priorities is implementation of two significant changes made by the First Step Act of 2018.

The First Step Act amended the statute providing for compassionate release to allow defendants for the first time to file for compassionate release, without having the Director of the Bureau of Prisons make a motion.  This procedural option is not yet accounted for in the guidelines, leading most appellate courts to hold that the Commission’s policy statement governing compassionate release does not apply to motions filed by defendants.  At the same time, in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the debate about what constitutes “extraordinary and compelling reasons” for compassionate release took center stage across the nation with differing results.

In addition, the First Step Act made changes to the “safety valve,” which relieves certain drug trafficking offenders from statutory mandatory minimum penalties.  The Act expanded eligibility to certain offenders with more than one criminal history point.  The Commission intends to issue amendments to section 5C1.2 to recognize the revised statutory criteria and consider changes to the 2-level reduction in the drug trafficking guideline currently tied to the statutory safety valve.

The Commission also set out its intent to implement criminal provisions contained in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which includes increased penalties for certain firearms offenses, and other legislative enactments that require Commission action.

The Commission published tentative priorities and invited public comment in September, receiving more than 8,000 letters of public comment in response. “The Commission is appreciative of the feedback it has received from all corners of the federal sentencing community,” stated Reeves. “As we now pivot to work on the final priorities set forth today, we look forward to a careful and detailed examination of these issues and our continued interaction with the public to ensure the federal sentencing guidelines properly reflect current law and promote uniformity in sentencing.”

Under federal law, judges are generally prohibited from changing a sentence once it has been imposed. Compassionate release, to put it simply, provides a “safety valve” against this general principle, allowing federal judges to reduce a prisoner’s sentence when it is warranted by “extraordinary and compelling reasons.” For the past thirty years, statutory and bureaucratic roadblocks made compassionate release an unlikely avenue for prisoners to receive sentence reductions. With the passage of the First Step Act of 2018, the U.S. Congress made the first significant changes to the compassionate release statute in decades, permitting defendants for the first time to bring such motions directly to their sentencing courts. An overwhelming majority of circuit courts have concluded that the First Step Act’s changes to the compassionate release statute mean that district judges are not free to consider any extraordinary and compelling reason that a defendant might raise. Nevertheless, appellate courts remain divided over what exactly constitutes an extraordinary and compelling reason for a sentence reduction. This Note examines the historical development of, and rationales for, compassionate release and the reasons why appellate courts have struggled to define and apply the “extraordinary and compelling reasons” standard consistently. After recognizing that Congress’s goals in creating the compassionate release mechanism were to promote consistency while keeping the sentencing power in the judiciary, this Note proposes a two-part solution to balance these goals. This Note’s proposed framework ensures that judicial discretion continues to serve a critical role in compassionate release decisions and seeks to resolve the current disagreements among appellate courts.

More than a year after it was enacted in 2018, key parts of the law are working as promised, restoring a modicum of fairness to federal sentencing and helping to reduce the country’s unconscionably large federal prison population. But other parts are not, demonstrating the need for continued advocacy and more congressional oversight. The way the Justice Department has been handling prisoner releases during the coronavirus pandemic gives some insight into what’s going wrong.

President Trump has bragged about signing the law, which was the first criminal justice reform bill passed in nearly a decade. But simply signing it is not enough. He needs to see it through.

The First Step Act is the product of years of advocacy by people across the political spectrum. Indeed, a very similar bipartisan bill nearly passed in 2015, but was dragged down by election-year politics. The Trump administration began working on its own criminal justice bill in early 2018, and an initial deal was catalyzed by a core group of bipartisan legislators. It was then refined through a series of compromises and, once the Senate decided to pick up the bill, sailed through both houses of Congress with supermajority support.

The law we now know as the First Step Act accomplishes two discrete things, both aimed at making the federal justice system fairer and more focused on rehabilitation.

Its sentencing reformcomponents shorten federal prison sentences and give people additional chances to avoid mandatory minimum penalties by expanding a “safety valve” that allows a judge to impose a sentence lower than the statutory minimum in some cases. These parts of the First Step Act are almost automatic: once the act was signed, judges immediately began sentencing people to shorter prison terms in cases came before them. Similarly, people in federal prison for pre-2010 crack cocaine offenses immediately became eligible to apply for resentencing to a shorter prison term.

The law’s prison reformelements are designed to improve conditions in federal prison in two ways. One is by curbing inhumane practices, such as eliminating the use of restraints on pregnant women and encouraging placing people in prisons that are closer to their families. The other is by reorienting prisons around rehabilitation rather than punishment. That is no small task. Successfully expanding rehabilitative programming in federal prison will require significant follow-through from Congress and the Department of Justice. It’s no surprise, then, that these distinct parts of the act are functioning differently.

Before 2010, an offense involving 5 grams of crack cocaine, a form of the drug more common in the Black community, was punished as severely as one involving 500grams of powder. The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 changed that, reducing this 100:1 disparity to 18:1 — but only on a forward-going basis. People convicted under the now-outdated crack laws were stuck serving the very sentences that Congress had just repudiated.

The First Step Act fixed that by making the Fair Sentencing Act retroactive. According to the Justice Department, as of May, roughly 3,000 people serving outdated sentences for crack cocaine crimes had already been resentenced to shorter prison terms. Shortened or bypassed mandatory minimums mean that every year another estimated 2,000 people will receive prison sentences 20 percent shorter than they would have.

Another 3,100 people were released in July 2019, anywhere from a few days to a few months early, when the First Step Act’s “good time credit fix” went into effect. This simple change allowed people in federal prison to earn approximately an extra week off their sentence per year — and it applied retroactively, too. For some people it meant seeing their friends and family months earlier than expected.

Taken together, these changes represent an important decrease in incarceration. One year after the First Step Act was signed, the federal prison population was around 5,000 people smaller, continuing several years of declines. It has continued to shrink amidst the coronavirus pandemic.

To be sure, there’s still a long way to go: the federal prison population remains sky-high. And the Department of Justice does not appear to be in complete lockstep with the White House’s celebration of the law. In some old crack cocaine cases, federal prosecutors are opposing resentencing motions or seeking to reincarcerate people who have just been released. Prosecutors in these cases argue that any motions for resentencing must also consider the (often higher) amount of the drug the applicant possessed according to presentence reports. Other technical disputes are also cropping up, with the Department of Justice often arguing for a narrow interpretation of the First Step Act.

The First Step Act calls for the Bureau of Prisons to significantly expand these opportunities. Within a few years, the BOP must have “evidence-based recidivism reduction programs and productive activities” available for allpeople in prison. That means vocational training, educational classes, and behavioral therapy (to name a few options recommended in the act) should be staffed and broadly available. Participating in these programs will in turn enable imprisoned people to earn “time credits” that they can put toward a transfer to prerelease custody — that is, a halfway house or even home confinement — theoretically allowing them to finish their sentence outside of a prison.

Rolling out this system as intended will be a challenge, however, in part because BOP programs are already understaffed and underfunded. Around 25 percent of people spending more than a year in federal prison have completed zeroprograms. A recent BOP budget document described a lengthy waiting list for basic literacy programs. And according to the Federal Defenders of New York, the true extent of the BOP’s programming shortfall isn’t even known, because the BOP won’t share information on programming availability or capacity. The bureau offered little insight into its existing capacity and needs at a pair of congressional oversight hearings last fall. Worse, a recent report from the First Step Act’s Independent Review Committee, made up of outside experts to advise and assist the government with implementing the law, casts doubt on the quality of the BOP’s existing programming.

The BOP’s lack of transparency also makes it hard to know how “time credits” are being awarded — and thus, whether the BOP is permitting people to make progr