Making the case for another way to describe releases from prison based on earned credits

Adam Gelb, who heads the Council on Criminal Justice, has this intriguing new Newsweek commentary concerning the term “early release.”  I recommend the piece in full, and here are excerpts (links from the original): 

“Early release” is used casually and nearly universally — by journalists and by reform advocates and opponents alike — to describe anyone who gets out of prison at anything shy of 100 percent of the maximum possible sentence.  Google “early release” and click the News tab to see just how common this is.

Its potency reflects the legacy of Willie Horton, the convicted murderer who was released from a Massachusetts prison on a weekend furlough and committed a rape.  This was in 1988, and Horton’s case, used against the Massachusetts governor and presidential candidate Michael Dukakis in that year’s election, became an incinerator for policies characterized as “soft on crime.”

Yet the phrase “early release” is fundamentally inaccurate and misleading.  As anyone involved in the criminal justice process will tell you — victims and survivors included — all states and the federal government have laws and policies that not only permit people to earn release prior to the expiration of their sentence, they encourage it.

In fact, that’s the central thrust of the First Step Act, which Congress passed with bipartisan support and President Donald Trump signed during his first term. That landmark legislation allows people in federal prison who are considered low risk, and who complete rehabilitative programs, to earn time credits that can trim their sentence or allow them to serve the final portion in home confinement or residential reentry centers….

The state and federal system each have their own complex set of rules that determine the minimum and maximum boundaries of prison terms, and they vary tremendously.  In Arkansas, people may serve as little as 17 percent of their possible maximum sentence, while in Arizona, they must serve 85 percent of the maximum before release. But whether that “release window” is large or small, judges and lawyers — and reporters — understand that the various release mechanisms mean defendants are highly unlikely to serve every day of their maximum sentence behind bars.

As such, there’s nothing “early” about the release of people who have completed certain programs, avoided disciplinary infractions, and/or convinced a parole board that they are ready to return home. Nor is there anything untoward and deceptive about it. It’s the law…. 

People have tried through the years to come up with an alternative. “Accelerated” and “expedited” release are among them.  “Earned” release is gaining popularity but so far, nothing’s really stuck outside the community of reformers. Finding a phrase that does stick isn’t a matter of political messaging or spin. It’s about acknowledging that when someone goes home before they max out their prison sentence, the system isn’t pulling one over on the public.