When does the power to modify a sentence based on 'extraordinary and compelling' reasons rest with the district court that imposed the sentence?

QUESTION PRESENTED This Court said in no uncertain terms that a district court, when considering a motion, may consider not only changes in law made retroactive but also any other “intervening changes of law or fact.” Section 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) of title 18 of the United States Code allows a district court to modify a sentence where the district court finds “extraordinary and compelling” reasons to do so. As this Court pointed out, this power belongs to district courts not appellate courts. Roughly one half of the appellate courts do not agree with Concepcion. The Court needs to exercise its own broad discretion and clarify its holding: the power to modify a sentence based on “extraordinary and compelling” reasons rests with the court that imposed the sentence in the first instance. When is the Court going to clean up the mess created by the appellate courts after its decision in Concepcion v. United States, 142 S. Ct. 2389 (2022)? i