I 
108TH CONGRESS 
1ST SESSION H. R. 2213
To study the incidence of downward departures in criminal cases and repeal 
provisions of the PROTECT Act that do not specifically deal with the 
prevention of the exploitation of children. 
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
MAY 22, 2003
Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. DELAHUNT, Mr. WATT, Ms. 
WATERS, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Ms. LINDA T. SA´NCHEZ of Cali-
fornia, Mr. SANDERS, Ms. LEE, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. FILNER, Ms. 
MILLENDER-MCDONALD, Mrs. JONES of Ohio, and Mr. HONDA) intro-
duced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Ju-
diciary 
A BILL 
To study the incidence of downward departures in criminal 
cases and repeal provisions of the PROTECT Act that 
do not specifically deal with the prevention of the exploi-
tation of children.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-
tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 
This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Judicial Use of Discre-
tion to Guarantee Equity in Sentencing Act of 2003’’ or 
‘‘JUDGES Act’’.
SEC. 2. A REPORT ON THE INCIDENCE OF DOWNWARD DE-
PARTURES. 
(a) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 180 days 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the United 
States Sentencing Commission shall submit to Congress 
a report on the incidence of downward departures from 
the United States Sentencing Guidelines. 
(b) CONTENT OF REPORT.—The report required by 
subsection (a) shall include—
(1) a discussion of the history and purpose of 
departures in the Federal sentencing guideline sys-
tem; 
(2) information on rates of departures from the 
sentencing guidelines, including information on vari-
ations in departure rates among different districts 
and judicial circuits, and among different offense 
and departure types, and an assessment of the fac-
tors that may account for these variations; 
(3) an analysis of the grounds provided by dis-
trict court judges when they depart from the guide-
lines, and whether the Commission should adopt 
guidelines or policy statement to prohibit, encourage, 
or discourage departures based on such grounds; 
(4) a review of departure appeals, including 
trends in the number and disposition of departure 
appeals;
(5) a comparison of the departure authority in 
Federal law with the departure authority in State 
sentencing guideline systems; 
(6) an assessment of the extent to which depar-
tures from the sentencing guidelines circumvent or 
promote operation of the sentencing guidelines sys-
tem; 
(7) an assessment of the extent to which depar-
tures from the sentencing guidelines undermine or 
promote the purposes of sentencing as set forth in 
section 3553(a)(2) of title 18, United States Code; 
(8) an assessment of variations in the mag-
nitude of departures and the frequency with which 
the final sentences result in imprisonment, inter-
mediate conditions of confinement, or release; 
(9) an assessment of the extent to which exist-
ing mechanisms to review departures from the sen-
tencing guidelines are sufficient to ensure that the 
purposes of sentencing referred to in paragraph (7) 
are achieved; and 
(10) any other information, assessments, or rec-
ommendations that the Commission considers to be 
appropriate. 
(c) PUBLIC HEARING.—In preparing the report, the 
Commission shall—
(1) hold at least one public hearing on the sub-
ject of guideline departures; and 
(2) solicit the views of the Federal judiciary, 
the Department of Justice, the defense bar, and 
other interested parties. 
SEC. 3. REPEAL OF NONCONFORMING PROVISIONS. 
Subsections (c) through (h), and (j) through (n) of 
section 401 the Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools 
to end the Exploitation of Children Today Act of 2003, 
or the PROTECT Act, are repealed, and shall be treated 
as though those subsections and the amendments made 
by those subsections had never taken effect.
Æ