What if the law says you can go home, but the courts refuse to let you?

Every year, thousands of incarcerated people ask for compassionate release after becoming seriously ill, growing elderly, or facing devastating family tragedies. Congress intended this process to give judges a way to bring people home when extraordinary circumstances demand it.

But that's not what's happening.

Only about 17% of compassionate release motions are granted. Why are so many being denied when the law was specifically expanded to make release more accessible?

The National Council argues in our latest comment to the U.S. Sentencing Commission that too many courts are misapplying or simply ignoring the compassionate release guidelines, creating barriers that Congress never intended.

Consider a parent trying to return home after the death or incapacitation of the child's other parent. Some judges require proof that no one else can care for the child, even though that is not the legal standard. Families are being forced into the impossible position of declaring they cannot or will not care for a child simply to give that child's parent a chance to come home.

Other courts are inventing their own tests, demanding proof that someone would be a "fit" parent before granting release. Others disregard severe medical conditions and the reality of inadequate medical care inside the Bureau of Prisons.

These decisions don't just misinterpret the law. They undermine the purpose of the First Step Act, which Congress enacted to reduce unnecessary incarceration and expand opportunities for release in extraordinary circumstances.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission has an opportunity to correct this. Until it does, people who meet the law's intent will continue to be denied the chance to return to their families.

Read our full comment to the U.S. Sentencing Commission to learn why these guidelines must be clarified and why reform cannot wait.