Although the Supreme Court accepted on an expedited schedule two cases challenging the constitutionality of the federal sentencing guidelines, no decision was rendered this term. Below is an excerpt from a periodical article discussing possible reasons why.
Tony Mauro
Legal Times
12-13-2004
Sitting for the final time in 2004, the Supreme Court on Monday failed to hand down anxiously awaited rulings on the constitutionality of federal sentencing guidelines, a possible sign of sharp divisions among the justices.
Instead, the Court issued four other opinions, including Florida v. Nixon, a death penalty case that appears to give defense lawyers greater leeway to devise trial strategy without being accused of ineffective assistance.
At the summertime urging of the solicitor general, the Court had expedited the handling of United States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan to remedy the "disarray" of the federal sentencing system in the wake of last June’s ruling in Blakely v. Washington, which struck down a state sentencing law similar to federal guidelines.
The Court heard arguments in the cases on the first day of its term in October, and many participants expected decisions by November. But the Court's adjournment without a decision means that Jan. 11 stands as the earliest date a ruling could come.
"I am genuinely amazed that the Supreme Court has now issued 11 opinions this term, and yet we still have not seen a ruling in Booker and Fanfan,"said Ohio State University College of Law professor Douglas Berman, who has closely watched the sentencing cases. He notes that last Dec. 10, the Court issued its campaign finance ruling in McConnell v. FEC -- one of the lengthiest decisions in its history -- following oral arguments in September 2003.
Berman attributes the delay in part to Chief Justice William Rehnquist's bout with thyroid cancer, which has kept him away from the Court since Nov.1. Rehnquist is known for urging fellow justices to write their opinions quickly in spite of their disagreements.
Also on Monday, the Court announced that Rehnquist would not participate incases argued in November -- unless his vote is needed to break a 4-4 tie --but will participate in cases argued in December. That news followed an announcement last Friday that Rehnquist intends to keep with tradition and swear in George W. Bush as president on Jan. 20. Taken together, the two announcements suggest that a Rehnquist retirement is not imminent -- even if he is conserving his energy by shedding cases argued in early November, when he was recuperating from surgery related to his cancer.
www.egmlaw.com