Leadership Conference urges Senate Judiciary Committee "not to advance" Prez Trump's slate of nominee to the US Sentencing Commission

I reported in this post last week about Prez Trump's (long overdue) nominations to the US Sentencing Commission, a critical criminal justice agency that has been crippled by having only two (of seven) Commissioners in place since the start of 2019.  In my prior post, I speculated that these nominations have been put forward too late in the year before a presidential election to likely move forward.  And now the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights has written this letter to Senate Judiciary Chair Lindsey Graham and ranking member Dianne Feinstein to urge them to not advance these nominees.   Here is some of the text of the letter: 

On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (The Leadership Conference), a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 220 national organizations to promote and protect civil and human rights in the United States, we write to urge the Judiciary Committee not to advance the slate of nominees to the United States Sentencing Commission that President Trump announced on August 12, 2020.  We are concerned that the four Republican nominees lack the diversity of race, viewpoint, and professional experience needed to reform a federal sentencing regime that has devastated communities of color for decades.  Our nation incarcerates people at a higher rate than any other country in the world.  The First Step Act of 2018 is proof of the bipartisan consensus in favor of changing this course.  But Senate confirmation of this homogeneous slate will delay meaningful sentencing reform and moves in the wrong direction at a moment when our nation demands a reckoning with structural and racial inequality....

[I]t is imperative that the Commission entrusted with such responsibility includes a diversity of experience and perspectives reflective of all individuals who move through federal courts. It is also no secret that policies are viewed as more legitimate if they are supported by diverse perspectives.  Considering the lack of diversity on the federal bench, a balance of viewpoints on the Commission is vital. While diversity on the Commission alone is not a cure-all for this nation’s mass incarceration crisis, it is key in fostering a more equitable system of justice....

Not a single Republican nominee is a person of color, and only one is a woman. As practitioners, each nominee’s experience with federal sentencing has been primarily through the lens of a prosecutor, U.S. Marshal, or both.  While these experiences are relevant to the Commission’s work, the disproportionate emphasis on them is not reflective of the diversity of background that Congress intended.  Moreover, the weight of these perspectives will worsen an already troubling bent towards law enforcement on the Commission, as the Department of Justice and the United States Parole Commission each have a designated ex officio member — an honor conspicuously not bestowed on any group that directly represents individuals in the federal legal system.  Two prospective nominees have particularly concerning records that suggest their inclusion on the Commission would hinder rather than redress this nation’s mass incarceration crisis. 

At a time when millions of people across this country are demanding that our institutions work to change course from the decades of systemic racism that have beget law enforcement brutality, it is more important than ever that the body charged with developing federal sentencing policy be representative of all people — particularly those upon whom it has had a disproportionate impact.  Past Commissions have taken important steps to address mass incarceration, from lowering the offense levels under the guidelines for drug trafficking offenses in 2014 to advocating as early as 1995 for parity between crack and powder cocaine.  The nominees recently proposed by President Trump, however, if confirmed by the Senate, are likely to undermine this progress by perpetuating outdated beliefs and confounding bipartisan efforts to reform our nation’s harsh sentencing practices.  We must not risk veering off the path towards meaningful sentencing reform. For these reasons, we urge the Judiciary Committee to reject the proposed slate of nominees for the U.S. Sentencing Commission, and to work to ensure that the Commission’s composition embodies the congressional intent of a diverse Commission membership. 

Prior related posts:

• Prez Trump makes (tough) nominations to US Sentencing Commission 
• Lots of notable reaction to Prez Trump's nominations to the US Sentencing Commission
• Another round of criticisms of Prez Trump's decision to nominate Bill Otis to US Sentencing Commission 
• FAMM writes extended letter to Prez Trump to "strongly discourage" re-nomination of Bill Otis to US Sentencing Commission 
• With his return to blogging, is Bill Otis no longer a potential nominee for the US Sentencing Commission? 
• Notable new talk of (badly needed) new nominees for the US Sentencing Commission
• Prez Trump finally announces full slate of (unlikely to be confirmed?) new nominees for the US Sentencing Commission 
• FAMM urges Senators to "refrain from filling the vacancies" on the US Sentencing Commission until next year