Rutherford v. United States · ¶106

To start, Congress's decision not to make its changes retroactive simply means that Congress did not intend for every person who committed § 924(c) offenses prior to the First Step Act's passage to be automatically eligible for relief. See ante, at 471 (“True, Congress chose not to reduce § 924(c) penalties on a categorical basis”). By making that one choice, however, Congress did not also decide that sentencing disparities created by those changes should never be considered in deciding compassionate-release motions. Indeed, Congress amended the compassionate-release statute in the First Step Act as well, so Congress easily could have specified that its nonretroactive changes should not be considered in compassionate-release determinations, just as it previously limited consideration of rehabilitation. See Concep cion, 597 U. S., at 494 (“Congress is not shy about” limiting courts'…

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