News Release

October 1, 2004

Media Contact: (202) 789-5200

New Supreme Court term begins with sentencing cases
High court has opportunity to overrule its most 'obnoxious' decisions

WASHINGTON--On Monday, the Supreme Court will begin its new term by hearing United States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan. Both cases consider the constitutionality of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Erik Luna, associate professor of law at the University of Utah and author of the Cato Policy Analysis "Misguided Guidelines: A Critique of Federal Sentencing," made the following comments:

"Some commentators have used apocalyptic terms to describe the upshot of last year's blockbuster sentencing case, Blakely v. Washington, in which the Court struck down a state punishment scheme that mirrored the federal system of so-called `sentencing guidelines.' The cases that will be argued on Monday could undermine the federal government's approach to punishment. But unlike many others, I see this as an unmitigated good rather than a legal Armageddon. If nothing else, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to effectively overrule some of its most obnoxious rulings in the recent past, including decisions that approved drastic increases in punishment based on conduct that was never charged or, even worse, alleged crimes for which the defendant was actually acquitted at trial. More importantly, the larger debate these cases have provoked is not only healthy but well overdue, stimulating a discussion about the constitutional perversions and unjust consequences under the federal guidelines."

Cato scholars Timothy Lynch, Robert A. Levy, Mark Moller, and Roger Pilon are also available for comment on the Court's new term. Please contact the media relations department at 202-789-5200 to arrange an interview.