PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 9, 2023
Terry Technical Correction Act
This bill broadens the scope of crack cocaine offenders who are eligible for a retroactive sentencing reduction under the First Step Act of 2018.
The First Step Act made the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 retroactive and authorized sentencing reductions for certain crack cocaine offenders convicted and sentenced before the Fair Sentencing Act became effective. Under current law, crack cocaine offenders whose conduct triggered a mandatory minimum sentence are eligible for a retroactive sentencing reduction under the First Step Act. However, in 2021, the Supreme Court held in Terry v. United States that low-level crack cocaine offenders whose conduct did not trigger a mandatory minimum sentence are not eligible for a retroactive sentencing reduction under the First Step Act.
This bill extends eligibility for a retroactive sentencing reduction under the First Step Act to all crack cocaine offenders convicted and sentenced before the Fair Sentencing Act became effective, including low-level offenders whose conduct did not trigger a mandatory minimum sentence.
People & committees
Rep. Jackson Lee, Sheila [D-TX-18] · D–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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.
Source last updated: May 27, 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.50 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.50 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.50 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.50 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.