PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 9, 1995
Minimum Mandatory Sentence Modification Act - Amends the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 to modify the limitation on the applicability of mandatory minimum penalties in certain cases. Specifies that in the case of any offense (currently, specified offenses under provisions of the Controlled Substances Act and the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act) the court shall impose a sentence pursuant to guidelines promulgated by the U.S. Sentencing Commission without regard to any statutory minimum sentence if the court finds at sentencing, after the Government has been afforded the opportunity to make a recommendation, that specified conditions apply (current law) and that the defendant had attained age 55 at the time of sentencing. Makes such provision applicable to all sentences imposed whether before, on, or after the date of the enactment of such Act. Directs the sentencing court, upon the application of any person whose sentence is governed by such provision, to modify that sentence to comply with this Act. Specifies that this Act shall not reduce the eligibility of any person for a sentence without regard to a statutory minimum sentence.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Alcee L. [D-FL-23] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.437 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.437 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.437 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.437 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.