PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 5, 2017
Smarter Sentencing Act of 2017
This bill amends the federal criminal code to expand the safety valve to allow a court to impose a sentence below the statutory mandatory minimum for an otherwise eligible drug offender who has three or fewer (currently, one or fewer) criminal history points.
The bill amends the Controlled Substances Act to reduce the mandatory minimum prison term for defendants who manufacture, distribute, or possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance. Specifically, it reduces mandatory minimums:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
from 10 years to 5 years for a first-time high-level offense (e.g., one kilogram or more of heroin),
from 20 years to 10 years for a high-level offense after one prior felony drug offense,
from life to 25 years for a high-level offense after two or more prior felony drug offenses,
from 5 years to 2 years for a first-time low-level offense (e.g., 100 to 999 grams of heroin), and
from 10 years to 5 years for a low-level offense after one prior felony drug offense.
Additionally, the bill amends the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act to modify the application of mandatory minimum prison terms for certain defendants who import or export a controlled substance. Specifically, it:
makes existing mandatory minimums inapplicable to a defendant who functions as a courier; and
establishes new, shorter mandatory minimum prison terms for a courier.
The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 applies retroactively to allow a court to reduce the prison term of a convicted crack cocaine offender sentenced before August 3, 2010.
The Department of Justice must report on and publish all federal criminal statutory offenses. Specified federal agencies, departments, and entities must report on and publish criminal regulatory offenses that they enforce.
People & committees
Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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 S.1933 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 S.1933 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 S.1933 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 S.1933 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.