FSR, Volume 37, Issue 1: Booker at Twenty

A new publisher and a new look for the Federal Sentencing Reporter

On behalf of Professors Doug Berman and Steve Chanenson and all the editors at the Federal Sentencing Reporter (FSR), I am excited to report on the publication of the latest issue of FSR, titled "Booker at Twenty." The 2005 Supreme Court decision in Booker v. United States — there were actually two separate majority opinions that together make up the holdings in the case — transformed the previously presumptive federal sentencing guidelines to “effectively advisory.” The sentencing regime created by Booker has remained in place for two decades now. In many ways so much has changed around federal sentencing law, policy, and practice over this period, and in many ways so little.

A host of substantive, procedural, and structural stories concerning Booker are covered in the articles and related materials appearing in the issue. It begins with an introductory essay authored by Professors Berman and Chanenson, titled "Two Decades Later." The FSR editors feel especially fortunate that the current Chair of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, Judge Carlton Reeves, co-authored an article with Counsel to the Chair, Con Reynolds, "Meeting the Demand for Democracy in Sentencing." The full table of contents for the issue is set out below with links to all the articles.

This is the first issue for our new publisher, Duke University Press. To celebrate, Duke University Press has made all the contents for this issue freely available for download for the next few months. It has also created a new look for FSR, which will now include four longer issues per volume.

Twenty years after Booker was decided, federal sentencing remains in flux and the subject of great criticism. The issue reflects on how Booker has changed the federal sentencing landscape, and it looks forward, too, on ways to improve federal sentencing under the constitutional framework created by Booker.

- - -

FSR, Volume 37, Issue 1: Booker at Twenty

Two Decades Later - by Steven L. Chanenson and Douglas A. Berman

Meeting the Demand for Democracy in Sentencing - by the Honorable Carleton W. Reeves and Con Reynolds

Booker at Twenty - by the Honorable Lynn Adelman

Plea Agreements and Suspending Disbelief - by Sam Merchant

Federal Inmates Who Died of COVID-19 in 2020: What Happened and Why - by Sylvia Royce

Looking Back, Looking Forward: The First Step Act and the Art of the Possible - by Jay Whetzel, Trent Cornish, Scott Anders, Joseph LaFratta, and Christopher Poulos

The King Is Dead, Long Live the King: Booker v. United States and Its Place in the History of Federal Sentencing Law and Policy - by Jonathan J. Wroblewski

Prepared Testimony: Blakely v. Washington and the Future of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: U.S. Sentencing Commission, before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, July 13, 2004 - Commissioner John R. Steer and Judge William K. Sessions, III

Prepared Testimony: U.S. Sentencing Commission, before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, February 10, 2005 - Judge Ricardo H. Hinojosa

Prepared Statement: U.S. Sentencing Commission, before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, March 16, 2006 - Judge Ricardo H. Hinojosa

Prepared Testimony: U.S. Sentencing Commission, before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. House of Representatives, October 12, 2011 - Judge Patti B. Saris