First Step Act credits require fresh review after end of Chevron

Listen to this article

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the dismissal of a federal prisoner’s habeas petition challenging the Bureau of Prisons‘ refusal to award First Step Act time credits earned before a formal risk and needs assessment.

The plaintiff alleged that, after sentencing, he participated in recidivism-reduction programs while held at a federal facility and accrued about 150 days of credits. When he was later transferred to a Bureau of Prisons facility, the agency refused to recognize those credits because he had not yet received the formal assessment that the agency treats as a prerequisite to “successful participation.”

The court held that the U.S. District Court acted too quickly in dismissing the petition without requiring a government response or allowing factual development. Construing the pro se petition liberally, the court found that the plaintiff sufficiently alleged participation in qualifying programs and explained that records documenting his participation may have been lost during transfers.

The court also rejected mootness. Although the plaintiff’s later “medium” risk classification may limit immediate application of the credits, the statutory scheme still allows possible relief through future reassessments or discretionary approval. A favorable ruling could therefore give him a bank of credits that might later be applied.

The court further directed the U.S. District Court to reassess the Bureau of Prisons’ interpretation under current administrative law. The prior ruling relied on Chevron deference, but after Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, courts must independently determine the best reading of the statute. The court expressed skepticism that the statute allows the agency to deny credits for programs completed after a sentence begins but before the agency conducts its assessment.

The 17 page opinion is Benson v. Edgefield, Lawyers Weekly No. 001-145-26.