Rutherford v. United States · ¶100

First, the majority argues that considering nonretroactive changes in law was, “[u]ntil very recently,” unprecedented. Ante, at 467. Far from it. Again, courts have for centuries considered all relevant evidence at sentence-modification proceedings, and sentencing disparities like those created by nonretroactive changes in law are relevant information. See Concepcion, 597 U. S., at 490–492; Part III–B, supra.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.