In a significant 9-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court—including Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, President Joe Biden’s appointee—ruled that some individuals convicted of certain gun-related crimes may be eligible for reduced prison sentences. The ruling clarifies that sentences under one section of the law can run concurrently, rather than consecutively, as had previously been interpreted by lower courts.

The case centered on Efrain Lora, who was convicted in a 2002 drug trafficking and murder case in New York City. Lora was sentenced under two subsections of 18 U.S.C. § 924: subsection (c), which explicitly requires consecutive sentences, and subsection (j), which outlines different penalties but does not require consecutive sentencing. The lower courts, including a Bush-appointed federal judge and an appellate court, upheld Lora’s combined 30-year sentence—25 years for conspiracy and five additional years for aiding and abetting.

However, the Supreme Court reversed those rulings. Writing for the Court, Justice Jackson emphasized that subsection (j) is independent from subsection (c) and does not inherit its sentencing restrictions. She noted, “Combining the two subsections would set them on a collision course,” adding that Congress did not include language in (j) requiring mandatory consecutive sentencing.

The ruling vacates Lora’s sentence and sends the case back to a lower court for resentencing, restoring judicial discretion in similar cases. Legal experts praised the decision as a return to sentencing fairness and adherence to the statute’s plain text.

This case marks another instance of bipartisan agreement on the Court, even involving a Biden appointee ruling against the original sentencing approach supported by his administration.