“The Demand for Democracy in Sentencing”

The title of this post is the title of this new essay now available via SSRN authored by Con Reynolds and Judge Carlton Reeves (who are, as noted at SSRN, “currently employed by and/or appointed to lead the United States Sentencing Commission). Here is its abstract:

In making the federal sentencing guidelines advisory, Booker v. United States made the influence of those guidelines dependent on their perceived legitimacy.  This Article argues that, given the link between law’s legitimacy and its democratic character, Booker should be read as a demand for democracy in sentencing. This demand echoes the one imbued in the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s statutory charter, which gives the agency unique potential to create administrative governance that is of the people, for the people, and by the people.  In detailing past and present efforts to fulfill that potential, this Article invites readers to assist the Commission in its continuing pursuit of more democratic sentencing policy.