Supreme Court Ruling Threatens Second Chances for Freed Men

Patrick Dewayne Smith, who was released in 2024 after serving 13 years for a nonviolent drug conviction, is facing the possibility of returning to prison due to a Supreme Court ruling that has impacted the interpretation of the First Step Act. The landmark criminal justice law, passed during President Donald Trump's first term, aimed to reform federal sentencing and offer second chances to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Supreme Court ruled in May that individuals sentenced under older, harsher laws cannot use the disparity between their sentences and current penalties to seek early compassionate release. This decision could send Smith and about a dozen others nationwide back to prison, according to FAMM, a sentencing reform advocacy group.

Smith, 47, has been rebuilding his life since his release, working two jobs and spending time with his family. He expressed anxiety about potential bad news, stating, "Every time I get a call, I’m hoping it’s some good news. Or, you know, at least not no bad news."

The First Step Act, championed by Jared Kushner, Trump's son-in-law, reduced some lengthy mandatory minimum sentences, particularly for nonviolent offenses. Trump stated the law would "make our communities safer and give former inmates a second chance at life after they have served their time."

While thousands have been released since the law's passage, recent Supreme Court rulings have created legal uncertainty for those serving long sentences. In 2023, the U.S. Sentencing Commission adopted new rules allowing judges to consider changes in the law when deciding on compassionate release for inmates who had served at least 10 years. However, the Department of Justice argued that these new rules exceeded the scope of the First Step Act.

The Supreme Court's 6-3 decision, written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, stated that sentencing disparities from past decades do not constitute "extraordinary and compelling" reasons for compassionate release. "It is hard to see how Congress’s deliberate decision not to extend newly reduced penalties to those already sentenced could be a convincing reason that ‘warrant(s)’ a reduction," Barrett wrote.

Daniel Harawa, a law professor at New York University, expressed concern about the implications of this decision for federal criminal justice reform.

Smith's legal team highlighted his "unremarkable" involvement in a drug conspiracy and money laundering case in 2010, but a federal conviction combined with his prior record triggered a life sentence. The judge at the time expressed reservations about the severity of the punishment but stated that legal constraints tied her hands.

After his release, Smith returned to Alabama and lived with his sister. Prosecutors have since challenged his release, citing the Supreme Court decision and arguing his release is no longer valid. A Justice Department official indicated that the department cannot agree to a sentence below what the law requires.

Smith's father, James Smith, voiced his dismay, stating, "When you got rapists and murderers and you get this guy on a nonviolent case and you want him for life, it doesn’t sit well with me."

A White House official stated that the administration is reviewing the developments, and Trump remains proud of signing the First Step Act.