A Growing Focus on Post-Prison Supervision
In recent discussions on criminal justice reform, attention has shifted from sentencing laws to what happens after prison. The federal supervised release system, originally intended to help people transition successfully back into the community, has become a major point of debate among policymakers, researchers, and reform advocates.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich recently wrote in a Fox News commentary that improving how the United States manages supervision after incarceration could be “the next frontier in criminal justice reform.” His statement aligns with recent reports from the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC), which show that the number of individuals on federal supervised release continues to grow each year.
In fiscal year 2024, more than 90 percent of individuals sentenced to federal prison also received a term of supervised release, according to the USSC’s most recent QuickFacts report. That figure has risen by nearly 11 percentage points since 2020, suggesting that supervision is now one of the largest components of the federal correctional system.
High Revocation Rates and Rising Costs
Congress has acted on cost savings before when it comes to prisons. In 2018, Congress passed and President Donald J. Trump signed the First Step Act. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) had a difficult time implementing but recent advancements with new BOP Director William Marshall, have led to major improvements in implementation. The USSC data show that of 51,576 supervision cases closed in 2024, one-third ended in revocation. About 23 percent of those revocations were for technical violations—missed appointments, curfew breaches, or other non-criminal infractions. These violations often result in a return to prison even when no new crime has been committed.
Each technical revocation can cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars per individual per year. When scaled nationally, these re-incarcerations represent…
Administrative procedure and judicial overreach unlawfully control PFR actions.
The government must be held accountable for the consequences of its actions.
What did they expect to happen when they pushed for lower prison populations to save money? Of course they have to keep them in house to show they are not soft on crime, so they supervise and then find violations to wash, rinse, repeat to show they are not soft on crime. Much like FLA who gets off on FTR violations, the USG has to do the same with those in supervision. Have to keep the money coming in from Congress. What did people expect? It is a self-licking ice cream cone of job security for those involved at all levels.
“We want you to get ahead and be good to go with society (but not really because we lose you and the dollar value attached to you)” – person who relies on this system. No, that is not a real quote but it is one you can hear in your head being said by those in positions who rely on the system for paychecks, political cred, etc.