On sentencing reform, facts did better than fear. ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

[link removed]

John, we need your support in the fight for fair elections as we head into 2024. The future of American democracy is at stake — and the Brennan Center has plans to shore up democratic systems and protect the election. Your gift today will help support election workers and defend the right to vote.



All donations are being matched through the end of the year. Can you contribute to double your impact today?

[link removed]



DONATE >>

[link removed]



Get ready: in election year 2024, fears of crime and warnings about criminal justice reform will become ever more clamorous. We will need to fight fear with facts. Now the results are in on the most recent major federal justice reform law. And it turns out reform actually helps public safety while enhancing fairness.

For decades, crime was the most potent wedge issue in American politics. Understandable worries about soaring violence in the 1970s and 1980s inflamed voters. Then, starting in the early 1990s, crime began to fall — a dramatic decline that lasted decades. A greater public sense of safety drained the issue of much demagoguery. And a remarkable left-right, bipartisan movement for a more fair and efficient justice system began to make significant headway.

Five years ago, that coalition won enactment of the First Step Act. It was the most meaningful federal sentencing reform in a decade, cutting away punishments that ruined lives but did little to improve public safety. It also built up rehabilitation programs in federal prisons. It was a bill backed by Reps. John Lewis (D-GA) and Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), sponsored by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA), and signed into law by President Trump, who even honored some beneficiaries of the law as guests at his State of the Union address.

How did it work out? According to the Council on Criminal Justice, recidivism is 37 percent lower among people released because of the First Step Act than among others leaving prison. It’s proof that data-driven sentencing reform benefits everyone: taxpayers, the people granted a second chance, and the families and communities that have been riven by excessive incarceration. That’s why last week, members of Law Enforcement Leaders to Reduce Crime and Incarceration

[link removed]

, a group of current and former chief prosecutors, police chiefs, sheriffs, and corrections officials that was part of the unique coalition that ensured the law’s passage, participated in a congressional briefing

[link removed]

hosted by the Brennan Center to commemorate its fifth anniversary. It was something unexpected in Washington these days: a celebration of good news.

The First Step Act expanded options for compassionate release, including for the elderly and the seriously ill. It granted judges — the people in the best position to balance public safety against the circumstances of the individual defendant — more discretion to choose an appropriate sentence. And it lowered some excessive mandatory minimum sentences.

Crucially, the law helps people prepare for reentry. It expanded access to substance abuse treatment and employment opportunities. It also promoted more humane prison conditions, placing people closer to their families, banning the shackling of pregnant women, and making menstrual products free for those in federal prison.

It was a proof of concept, in terms of both politics and policy. At a time when the two parties can’t agree on a lunch order, smart sentencing and prison reform have been rare opportunities for bipartisan agreement. This marked a shift. For the longest time, democracy issues were bipartisan: in 2006 the Senate voted 98–0 to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act, and Republican John McCain of Arizona teamed with Democrat Russ Feingold of Wisconsin to enact campaign finance reform. That comity seems as quaint as powdered wigs. Unexpectedly, criminal justice reform has a better chance of winning support from both parties.

True, the crime spike in recent years rattled that consensus. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R), who voted for an earlier version of the legislation as a congressman, now derides it as a “jailbreak bill.” But crime again is trending down as the pandemic recedes. We all should try to tamp down the fearmongering as the election season approaches.

There’s more to do. A bill to reduce the disparity between sentences for crack and powder cocaine cleared the House by a 361–66 margin, only to fall to dysfunction in the Senate. We should continue to fight to make sentences more reasonable, improve prison conditions, and help people leaving prison have a better chance at successful reentry. Bills pending in Congress right now would accomplish all of these things. It's time to take that next step.





Good News About Democracy

As states continue to pass laws that make voting harder and elections more vulnerable to interference, it’s important to remember that there is also a flourishing pro-democracy movement pushing many states in the right direction. In 2023, at least 24 states enacted more than 50 laws that protect voting and elections. “Yet state lawmakers cannot safeguard democracy on their own,” Ashleigh Maciolek writes. “Robust federal legislation is needed to ensure that democracy is protected across the country and that every voter has equal access to the ballot.” Read more

[link removed]

A Presidential Power Ripe for Abuse

The Constitution doesn’t grant the president express emergency powers, but over the years, Congress has passed hundreds of laws giving the president special powers to address military, economic, and labor crises. Presidents of both parties have exploited these broad, largely unchecked emergency powers to sidestep Congress on questions of policy. “Without reforms to strengthen Congress’s hand, a future President could leverage these powers to undermine not just the policymaking process, but democracy itself,” Elizabeth Goitein writes in Democracy Journal. Read more

[link removed]

The Threat to Activists in Georgia

For over a year, the Department of Homeland Security has labeled opponents of “Cop City,” a new police training facility in Atlanta, as domestic violent extremists. This designation can be dangerous, as it invites law enforcement to more harshly police and prosecute protesters, with few protections for their constitutional rights. A letter to members of Congress from the Brennan Center and a coalition of civil rights groups calls on lawmakers to investigate and curb DHS’s misuse of its counterterrorism authorities to target the Stop Cop City movement. Read more

[link removed]

Roundup of Gerrymandering Lawsuits in State Courts

Since the Supreme Court barred federal courts from weighing in on partisan gerrymandering claims, voters have increasingly turned to state courts and state constitutions to challenge unfair maps. Since the start of the 2021 redistricting cycle, partisan gerrymandering claims have been filed in 18 states. In State Court Report, Yurij Rudensky provides an overview of where these lawsuits stand. Read more

[link removed]





News

Noah Chauvin on congressional efforts to close a Fourth Amendment loophole // ROLL CALL

[link removed]

Elizabeth Goitein on the House’s fight over surveillance reform // VICE

[link removed]

Ames Grawert on crime trends // BLOOMBERG

[link removed]

Joseph Nunn on the flaws of the Insurrection Act // ROLLING STONE

[link removed]

Feedback on this newsletter? Email us at [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]







[link removed]

Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law

120 Broadway, Suite 1750 New York, NY 10271

646-292-8310

tel:646-292-8310

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Support Brennan Center

[link removed]

Want to change how you receive these emails or unsubscribe? Click here

[link removed]

to update your preferences.

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]

[link removed]