Anthony Townsend Kronman of the Yale Law School writes:

If judges are legislators and not adjudicators who are merely applying the rules they have been authorized to apply in the cases that come before them, what is it that gives their decisions legitimacy or authority? (Kronman, 1986)

Take a position. Do you agree or disagree that judges should be allowed discretion in sentencing?

First, title your post either “Judicial Discretion Should Be Allowed” or “Judges Should Always Follow Sentencing Guidelines.”

Then, using the information gained in this module and the resources noted above, make your case. What are the strengths and weaknesses associated with this issue? What do you believe to be most important in the matter of justice: complete judicial discretion or required oversight by the sentencing guidelines? Be sure to build your case with factual resources.

In your response to your peers, consider how well they justified their position, making use of available resources. Consider the following questions in your response posts:

• Did they support their position convincingly using appropriate resources?
• Which of their points make the most sense to you, even if you made your case for the opposing viewpoint?

Reference

Kronman, A. T. (1986). “The problem of judicial discretion.” Faculty Scholarship Series 1063, p. 486. Retrieved from https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/1063

To complete this assignment, review the Discussion Rubric document.