Context Is Everything In Justices' Sentencing Relief Decision <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1819583?nl_pk=6416fd97-1dc4-4e02-b7d8-a89ca44ecaf4&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=access-to-justice&utm_content=2024-04-06&read_main=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=8> In the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Pulsifer v. U.S. decision, limiting the number of drug offenders eligible for sentencing relief, the majority and dissent adopted very different contextual frames for interpreting the meaning of “and” — with the practical impact being that thousands more defendants will be subject to severe mandatory minimums, says Douglas Berman at Moritz College of Law. Opinion attached | Read full article » <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1819583?nl_pk=6416fd97-1dc4-4e02-b7d8-a89ca44ecaf4&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=access-to-justice&utm_content=2024-04-06&read_more=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=8> | Save to favorites » <https://www.law360.com/access-to-justice/articles/1819583?nl_pk=6416fd97-1dc4-4e02-b7d8-a89ca44ecaf4&utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=access-to-justice&utm_content=2024-04-06&read_later=1&nlsidx=0&nlaidx=8>