Whether the Eleventh Circuit's limitation on First Step relief contravenes Concepcion's holding, that in deciding whether to reduce the sentence of an eligible defendant, court's may consider intervening changes of law?

QUESTION PRESENTED Previously, the courts of appeals were divided over whether a district court could consider intervening changes to the law during First Step Act proceedings. Last year, this Court addressed the matter in Concepcion v. United States, 597 U.S. 481 (2022), and held that “the First Step Act allows district courts to consider intervening changes of law or fact in exercising their discretion to reduce a sentence pursuant to the First Step Act.” Id. at 2404. However, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has since held a district court’s discretion is far more limited. Specifically, the Eleventh Circuit held that, before it has authority to reduce a defendant’s sentence under the First Step Act, a district court must determine whether the defendant has already received the lowest statutory penalty based only on the Fair Sentencing Act and not taking any other intervening changes to the law into account. The question presented is: Whether the Eleventh Circuit’s limitation on First Step relief contravenes Concepcion’s holding, that in deciding whether to reduce the sentence of an eligible defendant, court’s may consider intervening changes of law? i PARTIES TO PROCEEDINGS AND