The US Supreme Court’s decisions in Fernandez v. US and Rutherford v. US have sharply limited the scope of compassionate release under the First Step Act, emphasizing that it cannot be used to revisit the validity of convictions or override congressional sentencing judgments. The rulings reflect a broader concern about preserving procedural limits on postconviction challenges and preventing an influx of claims outside the established habeas framework.
“One animating concern behind … this decision is that if there aren’t procedural limitations on the ability to attack the validity of a conviction, those challenges would be extremely common,” Bracewell’s Peter Siegal told Law360.
“Fernandez and Rutherford together make clear that while compassionate release can encompass a wide array of considerations, it is not a vehicle for second-guessing choices that Congress made,” said Siegal at Bracewell.
