Feds fumble push to squash prisoner transfer to halfway house at SCOTUS

Several justices balked at the federal government’s request to relitigate a question that the high court already agreed to decide.WASHINGTON (CN) — The government provoked the Supreme Court’s ire on Monday as it attempted to dissuade the justices from ruling on a Texas inmate’s push for early release from federal prison.During oral arguments, the Justice Department suggested that the high court dismiss the case before it as improvidently granted, allowing the justices to avoid weighing in on complex questions about applying the legal procedure of habeas corpus under a 2018 criminal justice reform law.Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, a Joe Biden appointee, balked at the proposal, noting the high court had already decided to weigh in on the question when it granted certiorari in June.“What is concerning me about your DIG argument is that it sounds like we are relitigating certiorari,” Jackson said, using the acronym for such a dismissal.Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a Barack Obama appointee, said the government was trying to win on an argument it did not make at the petition stage when the high court was considering hearing the appeal. And Jackson worried the idea was only being floated now to undermine the justices’ consideration of the question presented.At issue was whether federal prisoners can bring habeas petitions to challenge decisions regarding accelerated release under the First Step Act. The 2018 criminal justice reform law allows prisoners to earn credits toward placement in prerelease custody — a halfway house or home confinement — based on their participation in recidivism reduction programs.The Bureau of Prisons refused to grant William Maxwell accelerated release despite his credits under the law. Because he felt he was being held in prison in violation of federal law, Maxwell filed a habeas petition seeking release.But the Fifth Circuit ruled Maxwell should have brought a civil rights lawsuit instead, denying his appeal.The government said the appeals court decision was wrong, arguing Maxwell’s claim had to be brought through a habeas petition. However, it said the Supreme Court shouldn’t fix the Fifth Circuit’s error because Maxwell was being released in January.As a practical matter, the government said Maxwell’s imminent release would moot a decision in the case before the high court issued a ruling. The Justice Department said this was a complication that didn’t get brought up in the certiorari briefs.“That was our bad,” Kevin Barber, assistant to the solicitor general at the Justice Department, said. “We apologize for that.”Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Donald Trump appointee, quipped that he had never heard “my bad” from the high court’s podium before.Justice Samuel Alito, a George W. Bush appointee, said there was no categorical rule that the case couldn’t be dismissed as improvidently granted if the court had “a very severe case of buyer’s regret.”Most of the justices appeared interested in still weighing in on the appeal, leaning toward a ruling in Maxwell’s favor. But there were also concerns about the trickle-down effects of their decision.“What happens to the next case when somebody does seek a change in the level of custody from, say, a medium security to a minimum security or from a maximum security to a medium security?” Gorsuch asked. “Have you put the camel’s nose under the tent?”Justice Amy Coney Barrett, another Trump appointee, said the high court could avoid touching those future issues by only ruling on the question before them.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads