Rutherford v. United States · ¶31

Petitioners argue that the Third Circuit's decisions depart from the plain text of § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) and ignore binding guidance from the Sentencing Commission. We disagree. When Congress declines to make a sentencing amendment retroactive, the fact that a preamendment sentence is longer than it would have been postamendment is not an “extraordinary and compelling reaso[n]” that “warrant[s]” a sentence reduction. 18 U. S. C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Insofar as the Commission's amended policy statement maintains otherwise, it conficts with the statute.

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