Justice Notes: New Year Justice—Sentencing
A White-Collar Journal forum for criminal justice, lived experience, and the personal search for redemption
Early in the new year, America is once again debating mass incarceration, and once again the conversation is being led by people who have never crossed the threshold of a prison gate. Proposed revisions to federal sentencing guidelines promise “common-sense updates” and “greater proportionality,” but without firsthand understanding of incarceration itself, these efforts risk becoming another technocratic exercise detached from human reality. Reform that does not account for the psychological, social, and moral devastation of prison life will not meaningfully reduce recidivism—or mass incarceration itself.
Sentencing Reform Without Lived Experience Is Not Reform
Recently, there has been an increasing amount of discussion regarding the issue of mass incarceration in America. Sentencing guidelines—a major contributing factor—appear to be under review by the United States Sentencing Commission, which is currently inviting public comment on proposed revisions through February 10, 2026.
According to the Commission’s website on December 12, 2025, “These proposals aim to promote public safety and reduce unwarranted disparities by providing new enhancements, simplifying the Guidelines Manual, and making other common-sense updates to the federal sentencing system.”
The stated goal is to provide more proportionate sentencing guidelines that align with progressive social objectives and, ultimately, to confront the growing menace of mass incarceration in America today. The problem is that the group assigned this task does not understand what constitutes “long” and “short” sentences in any meaningful sense. Their framework exists in a vacuum because the starting point itself is flawed.
Unless someone has experienced the trauma of incarceration—the sense of exile, the disconnection from humanity, and the excruciating self-loathing that an inmate experiences the first time he or she crosses the portal into prison—revisions to sentencing guidelines are unlikely to become either proportionate or productive.
Compounding this failure is the reality that the American criminal justice system has always prioritized punishment over rehabilitation. Programs ostensibly designed to “reform” criminal citizens are typically vague templates with little substance and even less meaningful commitment from the institutions that implement them.
Life Inside a “Minimum-Security” Federal Prison
My own experience as an inmate at FMC Devens, a federal satellite prison camp, reflects this reality. I served eighteen months there before being released in 2020.
The official statements of the Federal Bureau of Prisons claim that the agency provides “humane facilities.” What they do not mention—yet appears to be an unspoken objective—is punishment for its own sake.
Even in minimum-security facilities within the federal system, daily life is defined by the attitudes of correctional officers, deteriorating infrastructure, decay everywhere, and arbitrary changes in protocols and work assignments. These conditions are not incidental; they communicate priorities.
Bulletin boards advertise courses and seminars—résumé building, reentry strategies, interview preparedness, family orientation—but these programs are largely half-hearted. Many are run by inmates rather than professionals with appropriate expertise. When release finally comes, an inmate leaves with a T-shirt, a new pair of jeans, sneakers, a felony conviction, few employment prospects, and perhaps $100 from a commissary account.
What follows them out the door is far heavier: excruciating self-loathing that often becomes permanent.
Race, Reentry, and Structural Neglect
During my time at FMC Devens, I formed relationships with many young Black inmates and became acutely aware of the specific challenges they faced long before incarceration. Many grew up in environments where perceived options were limited to gang member, drug dealer, elite athlete, or victim.
Despite this reality, they are released back into their communities with no additional preparation, no structural support, and no acknowledgment of the disadvantages that shaped their lives in the first place. Onerous restitution payments—entirely disconnected from the economic realities facing people with felony convictions—become yet another barrier to successful reentry.
Conclusion
Until there is an honest reckoning with the real impact of incarceration on America’s criminal citizenry, recidivism will remain an unachievable goal. Without lived experience informing policy, sentencing reform will continue to miss the mark—and the aspiration of reducing mass incarceration will remain just that: an aspiration, not a reality.
If you’re drawn to the idea of storytelling as self-reckoning, I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments.
Thank you for reading White-Collar Journal. Subscribing is free, and I hope you’ll continue with me as I explore stories of incarceration, justice, and redemption.
If this piece resonated with you, consider sharing it or leaving a comment. To support this work and help spread awareness about justice reform for white-collar defendants, subscribe to White-Collar Journal and stay connected. John DiMenna is a member of the White Collar Support Group.
To leave a comment, Substack may ask you to verify your email address (a one-time step to prevent spam). You don’t need to subscribe or create an account. Just check your inbox for a one-time link.