Rutherford v. United States (Compassionate Relief)

from Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) · host Attorney RJ Dieken, Loki Esq Law, Montana

Send us Fan MailHeld: When Congress declines to make a sentencing amendment retroactive—as with the change to §924(c)—the resulting sentencing disparity cannot serve as an “extraordinary and compelling” reason that warrants a sentence reduction under 18 U. S. C. §3582(c)(1)(A)(i). Pp. 8–17.Support the show

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Jun 6, 2026

Embed this episode

Attribution link and audio player

NOW PLAYING

Rutherford v. United States (Compassionate Relief)

0:00 13:43

1×

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

Share this episode

Similar Episodes

No similar episodes found.

Similar Podcasts

No similar podcasts found.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast)?

This episode is 13 minutes long.

When was this Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) episode published?

This episode was published on June 6, 2026.

Can I download this Supreme Court Decision Syllabus (SCOTUS Podcast) episode?

Yes. Use the download control on the episode player to save the publisher-provided media file.

URL copied to clipboard!