November 1, 2002, marked the 15th anniversary of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines driven by the concerns of disparate treatment and undue leniency in punishment. Under the U.S. Sentencing Commission created by Congress, the Federal justice system underwent a revision of its approach to sentencing criminal defendants, thereby creating the Sentencing Guidelines. The Guidelines have since proven to be unfair and unworkable in practice. This paper begins by providing a brief history of sentencing before the Guidelines and sentencing under the Guidelines. Sentencing under the Guidelines began with the Sentencing Reform Act and the creation of the U.S. Sentencing Commission. The Commission, considered to be unconstitutional, established these Guidelines. The overt transfer of sentencing authority from the judiciary to Congress and the Commission, as well as the shift of power from trial judges to prosecutors, is seen as undermining punishment as the product of moral judgment. Undermining moral judgment, are judges mechanically evaluating defendants as inanimate objects rather than human beings. In addition, another problem with Federal sentencing involves the hidden nullification of the Guidelines by criminal justice actors. Sentencing beyond the Guidelines requires successful reform projects recognizing that sentencing discretion is a tool that can be used for positive goals, such as creatively structuring a sentence that fits both crime and criminal. A truly beneficial renovation of Federal sentencing would examine the entire process from a holistic perspective. Sentencing reform efforts should be built on the following general ideas: (1) shared discretion; (2) real guidelines; and (3) written reasons, appellate review, and institutional memory. The American concept of justice has demanded the repeal of the Guidelines and the dissolution of the Commission. The Guidelines have undermined the legitimacy of sentencing law, diluting and obscuring moral judgment. It is now seen as a time for embarking on a new age of moral judgment in sentencing. References