Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-1650_3dq3.pdf
Page Number: 26

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

3 

KAVANAUGH, J., dissenting 

v. United States, 562 U. S. 476, 501–502, n. 14 (2011).  As 
relevant here, Congress has made clear that courts may re-
duce “an imposed term of imprisonment to the extent” such
a reduction is “expressly permitted by statute.”  18 U. S. C. 
§3582(c)(1)(B) (emphasis added).

The First Step Act states that the district court “may . . .
impose  a  reduced  sentence  as  if ”  the  lower  sentencing
ranges for crack-cocaine offenses “were in effect at the time
the  covered  offense  was  committed.”    §404(b),  132  Stat.
5222.  By its terms, the First Step Act authorizes consider-
ation only of the lower sentencing ranges for crack-cocaine 
offenses.  The First Step Act does not authorize considera-
tion of unrelated intervening legal or factual changes.  In-
deed, the relevant provision of the First Step Act does not 
mention changes other than the lower sentencing ranges for 
crack-cocaine offenses.  Therefore, the First Step Act does 
not  “expressly  permi[t]”  reductions  based  on  those  unre-
lated intervening changes.  18 U. S. C. §3582(c)(1)(B).

In  support  of  its  conclusion  that  district  courts  in  First 
Step  Act  sentence-modification  proceedings  may  consider 
other unrelated changes, the Court cites Pepper and similar 
decisions.  See ante, at 8–9.  But those decisions involved 
resentencings, not sentence-modification proceedings.  See 
Pepper, 562 U. S., at 486–487.  Those cases therefore do not 
support  the  Court’s  approach  here.    To  reiterate,  for  sen-
tence-modification proceedings, Congress has declared that
courts may reduce a sentence only as “expressly permitted
by statute.”  18 U. S. C. §3582(c)(1)(B).  And the First Step
Act does not authorize consideration of unrelated interven-
ing legal or factual changes since the original sentencing. 
The Court’s disregard of the text of the First Step Act and
§3582(c)(1)(B) will create significant and inexplicable sen-
tencing inequities.  Consider the following.  First Step Act
sentence-modification proceedings are available only for of-
fenders  who  were  sentenced  before  August  3,  2010.  So  a