FIRST STEP Act

Trump Might Not Support Criminal Justice Reforms Anymore. That Doesn't Erase His Past Success.

We probably won’t see a follow up to the FIRST STEP Act. But it’s still been a boon to federal prisoners.

|

Does it matter whether President Donald Trump actually supports criminal justice reform as long as he signs the relevant bills into law?

That's the focus of an insidery Politico piece by Gabby Orr and Daniel Lippman, which features anonymous people connected to Trump saying that the president thinks the important reforms of the FIRST STEP Act are a "dud" because it doesn't motivate his voters and the Democrats want credit for the bill.

The FIRST STEP Act was a bipartisan affair, signed into law by Trump, but hammered out by reform-minded members of Congress and pushed by Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner and celebrity Kim Kardashian. The FIRST STEP Act reduced some federal mandatory minimum sentences, including some retroactively, and increased the amount of "good time" credits inmates can earn to get out of prison earlier (the federal prison system does not offer parole).

The law has benefited thousands of federal prisoners, according to stats released in July by the Department of Justice. Trump has made note of the FIRST STEP Act in some speeches. But according to Politico, he doesn't actually care that much about it and is not happy that he might not benefit politically from its passage, while Democrats might. As Politico notes:

Kushner, whose own father spent more than a year in federal prison, worked closely with Democratic and Republican senators to get the criminal justice reform bill over the finish line last year—often telling his tough-on-crime boss it was worth expending political capital to seize a rare opportunity to overcome the deeply partisan divide on Capitol Hill and solidify his image as a pragmatic dealmaker.

But now, Trump "is telling people he's mad" at how criminal justice reform has panned out, according to a person close to the president. "He's really mad that he did it. He's saying that he's furious at Jared because Jared is telling him he's going to get all these votes of all these felons."

Color me less than outraged. Trump is only saying the kind of thing out loud that other politicians would have the good sense to keep to themselves, even though their motivations would not be that different. Trump is an openly transactional politician—he wants to benefit in some way from his political decisions. Certainly, the members of Congress who actually hammered out the FIRST STEP Act are also hoping to get credit from voters when re-election time comes around. And Democratic challengers to Trump are wheeling out their own criminal justice reform packages in the hopes of winning over voters.

CNN pundit and criminal justice reform activist Van Jones sees these anonymous whispers as coming from folks in Trump's orbit who never supported the FIRST STEP Act in the first place and are happy to put out the message that these types of bills are not in Trump's interest. Here's what he told Politico:

"There's always been a bunch of people in the building, they didn't like it before, during or after, and they've always been able to leak out anonymous bullshit quotes that then very quickly have egg on their faces because Trump does something else positive in this direction of throws in another line in a speech," said Jones, who confirmed that Trump has been frustrated with the lack of credit he's received.

It may be true that Trump is unhappy that his signing of the FIRST STEP Act doesn't give him political ownership of criminal justice reform, and it may well mean that we'll see no more such reforms under Trump. But the FIRST STEP Act did, in fact, get signed, and it has made life better for thousands. That's what matters. Let's not clutch our collective pearls that a president's support for a law is significantly influenced by the political advantages he hopes to gain from signing it.

NEXT: Judge Poised to Reject Suit by 90 'Jane Does' Who Say Salesforce Is Responsible for Sex Trafficking

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. The most important criminal justice reform I want to see is the nationwide restoration of voting rights for convicted felons. Indeed, I want them voting even while they’re behind bars.

  2. I’m not sure what the point of this article is. Yes, Trump gets credit for signing in the law. But…that’s it. What he is now showing is that yes, it was purely transactional. What it also shows is that he has no political vision, no moral compass and that if elected again his signature will go to the highest bidder. By backtracking Trump is showing that A) he only signed it because he expected political gain, or B) He is a moron and din’t know what he was signing. Notice that there is no C) he signed it because he saw a good piece of legislation and decided it was good for the country and the right thing to do.

    1. The point of the article is to say all the stuff that you just spewed doesn’t really matter. What matters is that the bill got passed. Who cares why/how.

    2. A politician who cares about his poll numbers and getting credit??
      I am SHOCKED! Shocked I say!

  3. OT: Pelosi poised to properly propose impeachment. Good luck.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4iDurCE3Yk

    1. Wow, would you look at that! Another of my predictions comes true — not bad for an alleged “troll” or “parody account.”

  4. OT: Rest In Peace Robert Hunter. Let there be songs to fill the air!

  5. Its all a show – he’s just trying to get Kim to answer his texts again.

  6. To comment on the merits of the bill itself – I hope that Reason, when advocating further reforms, will maintain the distinction between nonviolent or first offenders on the one hand and repeat violent offenders on the other hand.

    Some “libertarian centrist” voice would help a lot to counter the reflexive “overincarceration” narrative which lumps violent repeat offenders with the ones who aren’t. In other words, instead of harping on the raw numbers of people in prison, distinguish among the types of prisoners.

    1. I hope that Reason, when advocating further reforms, will maintain the distinction between nonviolent or first offenders on the one hand and repeat violent offenders on the other hand.

      They haven’t done that in their advocacy up to this point. Almost nobody benefiting from the “First Step” act are first time or non-violent offenders. That isn’t why Reason supports “criminal justice reform” they support it for the same reason every radical left wing group has supported it since the 1970s when we began addressing the rampant violent crime problem in this country in the first place.

      1. Almost nobody benefiting from the “First Step” act are first time or non-violent offenders.

        “The act, among many provisions, retroactively applies the Fair Sentencing Act, allows for employees to store their firearms securely at federal prisons, restricts the use of restraints on pregnant women, expands compassionate release for terminally ill patients, places prisoners closer to family in some cases, authorizes new markets for Federal Prison Industries, mandates de-escalation training for correctional officers and employees, and improves feminine hygiene in prison.”

  7. if you think Anne`s story is unimAginAble,, three weeks-Ago fAther in lAw worked And got pAid $4021 sitting there from their ApArtment And there best friend’s mother-in-lAw`s neighbour done this for 10-months And eArnt more thAn $4021 in their spAre time At there mAc. follow the instructions At this Address, ><<HERE☛  www.cashin3.com

Please to post comments