I think the point of this is that the federal government doesn’t have the authority to set mandatory sentencing for this crime.
No, I understand the controversey involves folks who have finished their sentences but they end up at the whim of a judge or a state or federal board being kept indefinitely often because there are no safe places to send them where they might not re-offend or where they won’t be harrassed or rejected by a hostile public.
The congress or state legislatures can by law increase sentencing lengths or direct that the courts not do this without legislative guidance but it appears they would rather pass the buck to the courts to “arbitrarily” do this,
as there is no real public opposition to this sad situation.
The congress can pass measures by 3/4 th’s majorities in both the representive and the senatorial branches directing the federal courts not to take on this role if they so desired and the courts including the Supreme would have to follow...yet the legislative branch has no political desire to do this right now....at least until the courts start using these same legal arguements under the Nand P clause to say..demand political candidates prove their citizenships or to actively remove sitting legislators from power!
The Supremes have overstepped here, over a fairly emotional issue and congess needs to man up and slap the courts back. The courts don’t have the right to keep a man beyond his sentencing timelines, no matter what the crime is...only the legislature can define what those statues are! The sentencing guidelines may need to changed, but the courts should not arbitrarily do this on their own!