Judges: Congress Should Not Rush Response to Sentencing Decision

     Three federal judges, one speaking on behalf of hundreds of colleagues, told the U.S. Sentencing Commission on February 15 they hope Congress will respond slowly to a Supreme Court ruling that made federal sentencing guidelines advisory only.

     The Commission held a new round of hearings in the wake of the Supreme Court's January 12 decision in the cases of Booker v. U.S. and Fanfan v. U.S.

     Chief Judge Thomas Hogan of the District Court for the District of Columbia said that judges and the commission should "have some time, a year or more" to assess empirical data on sentences imposed as a result of the Supreme Court ruling.

     Hogan is a member of the Executive Committee of the policy-making Judicial Conference of the United States, but testified as an individual judge and not on behalf of the federal judiciary.

     Chief Judge Lawrence Piersol of the District of South Dakota testified as president of the Federal Judges Association. He said the group's board of directors unanimously adopted a resolution "to ask Congress to allow the present situation time to work, and only if it does not ultimately work to the satisfaction of Congress, should Congress then proceed."

     Such action, if taken, should come "in consultation with the courts, academics, the Justice Department, the United States Sentencing Commission, and other interested parties to fashion some changes," the FJA resolution said.

     Judge Richard Kopf of the District of Nebraska submitted written testimony that said, "Congress and the commission should go slow and see what happens." He added: "If most district judges exercise the restraint that I predict they will, and circuit judges use guidelines-sensitive standards ... Booker will turn out to be ... a good thing."