Federal Judges Fight Back

The U.S. Supreme Court today took a well-aimed shot at congress' attempt to decide who should go to prison for how long.

In a 7-2 decision, the court said federal trial judges can depart from mandatory sentencing rules that require longer prison terms for bad guys who are convicted of dealing crack cocaine rather than the powder version.

In essence, the rule said a crack dealer who sold less than 2 ounces of evil must do the same time as a a different dealer who sold almost 1.5 pounds of evil. This dubious distinction has angered judges, lawyers and civil libertarians for years.

More important than the specific issue at hand is the majority decision's declaration that sentencing guidelines should be "advisory" rather than mandatory. When "advisory' is better defined based on future cases, trial judges just might be able to avoid sending nuns to prison for five years if they try to sneak across the border from Mexico.

My Thought Crimes

I am acquainted with more than one Saudi citizen who (to put it mildly) questions the U.S. government’s foreign policy in the Middle East.

I once shared a meal with two members of the Chinese Communist Party.

I have attended social events alongside drug addicts, Iranians, illegal immigrants and people carrying guns.

I believe it is wrong for my Internet service provider to cooperate with the National Security Agency in monitoring calls, emails, and anything else that travels along phone lines.

I believe it is unconstitutional to throw people into prison simply to coerce them into giving up information. That includes news reporters.

Now that I’ve posted this and the tags below, I wonder who might knock on my door.

This could be interesting.