Mandatory Sentencing Enhancements and Career Offender Provisions

← Back to Category — Criminal Justice Reform

Repeal Three Strikes Laws and Mandatory Minimums

AKA “Restore accountability in criminal law”


Which agency/agencies promulgated the regulation? *
U.S. Sentencing Commission, Department of Justice
Which title, parts, and/or sections of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) should be rescinded? *
The following titles, parts, and sections of federal law and regulations should be revised to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences and three-strikes laws, ensuring sentencing is based on individual circumstances rather than rigid, one-size-fits-all rules: 21 U.S.C. § 841 – Drug-Related Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Rescission Focus: Modify 21 U.S.C. § 841 to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for drug-related offenses. This change would give judges the discretion to impose sentences that are proportionate to the crime and individual circumstances, rather than mandating fixed sentences for certain drug convictions. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) – Armed Career Criminal Act (Federal Three-Strikes Law) Rescission Focus: Repeal 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), which imposes mandatory 15-year minimum sentences for individuals convicted of three or more violent felonies. Replace it with a system that allows judges to consider mitigating factors and individual rehabilitation before imposing sentences, rather than applying an automatic, harsh penalty for repeat offenders. 28 CFR Part 571 – Sentence Computation for Federal Inmates Rescission Focus: Modify 28 CFR Part 571 to align with sentencing reforms that remove mandatory minimums and three-strikes laws. Ensure that sentence computation is more flexible, and that federal inmates are not subjected to inflexible sentencing rules that restrict judicial discretion.
What is your name?
—OPTIONAL--
Is your proposed rescission a notice of proposed rulemaking, final rule, direct final rule, interim final rule, or interpretive rule? *
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
What is the name of the regulation being rescinded, if applicable? *
Mandatory Sentencing Enhancements and Career Offender Provisions
Please provide a short summary of the justifications for the rescission. *
These sentencing schemes remove judicial discretion, result in disproportionate punishment, and overcrowd prisons without improving safety.
Please insert the address of the agency. [NPRM, DFR, and IFR only]
U.S. Sentencing Commission One Columbus Circle, NE, Suite 2-500 Washington, DC 20002
Please insert the contact information for the agency. *
(202) 502-4597
What is the background for the regulation being rescinded? *
Designed during the "tough on crime" era, these provisions have led to mass incarceration and have shown little impact on deterrence.
Explain the reasons for the rescission. *
Restoring judicial discretion promotes individualized sentencing, reduces racial disparities, and allows rehabilitation-based alternatives.
Describe the text of the relevant C.F.R. provisions as it will exist after the rescission. *
Mandatory minimums and three-strikes enhancements will be removed. Sentencing will return to guideline-based ranges with full judicial discretion
Please insert the name of the current agency head. *
Judge Carlton W. Reeves
Please insert the title of the agency head. *
Chair, U.S. Sentencing Commission

← Back to Category — Criminal Justice Reform