Activist judges could release violent felons with new bill

Rantz: Activist judges would have right to release any violent criminal they want to with new bill

Jan 29, 2025, 4:55 PM | Updated: Jan 30, 2025, 3:24 am

AM 770 KTTH host

In another criminal justice reform bill that defies common sense and endangers public safety, Washington Democrats are pushing legislation that would empower activist judges to release dangerous felons from prison before they’ve completed their sentences, based on nothing more than their own subjective judgments. The impetus for the bill? There are too many violent criminals representing “low-income communities and communities of color” currently serving long sentences.

would grant sentencing courts the authority to shorten original sentences (including to the point of release) if they determine that the sentence “no longer serves the interests of justice.” If passed, beginning July 1, 2026, any criminals incarcerated for felony convictions 鈥� excluding those sentenced as persistent offenders or for first-degree aggravated murder 鈥� can petition for sentence modification under specific criteria.

For instance, offenders who committed their crimes at age 17 or younger and have served at least seven years, or those who are terminally ill, would be eligible to petition. The bill gradually expands eligibility in subsequent years to include offenders up to age 25 and older because Democrats claim brains aren’t fully formed until people are in their mid-20s, preventing people from understanding that there are consequences to murder.

Ultimately, however, the bill said any eligible adult felon who spent at least 10 years in jail could be released early.

Another Washington Democrat bill that goes easy on criminals

This bill, under the guise of “judicial discretion,” threatens to undermine the very foundation of our justice system and put our communities even more at risk.

Proponents argued that this legislation addresses the disproportionate impact of long-term incarceration on low-income communities and racial minorities. They claimed that early release opportunities encourage rehabilitation and result in significant cost savings for the state (as if, suddenly, Democrats care about government spending). The legislation even claims that research shows a lower recidivism rate for felons who are granted early release.

While the bill’s supporters tout rehabilitation and cost savings, they conveniently overlook the clear dangers of releasing convicted felons back into society prematurely. The criteria for sentence modification are alarmingly subjective, relying on assessments of an inmate’s rehabilitation, age, time served and even “diminished physical condition.” Such vague standards open the door for activist judges, some who have openly claimed the criminal justice system is racist or that prison doesn’t rehabilitate offenders, and lenient decisions that will jeopardize public safety.

And claims of supportive research are misleading, not that activist judges particularly care.

Recent studies looked at recidivism rates of with mere months left on their sentences, not serious felonious criminals who earned lengthy sentences due to the severe nature of their crimes. They also included continued punishment, like , which House Bill 1125 does not do. The studies reveal there’s no causal effect between lower recidivism rates and early release. Factors like family support play an important role.

This is a pattern to help criminals, empower activist judges

Washington Democrats have already adopted a troubling pattern of leniency toward criminals. This newest push would be beyond reckless.

How many stories where offenders with violent histories were released early or not harshly punished to begin with, only to reoffend, sometimes with tragic consequences, do we need?聽Moreover, the bill places an undue burden on victims and their families. They are forced to relive their trauma during resentencing hearings and face the possibility of their assailants being released early. This disregard for victims’ rights is both callous and unjust.

House Bill 1125 is not an isolated case but part of a broader agenda by some lawmakers to prioritize the rights of criminals over the safety of law-abiding citizens. Efforts to reduce sentences, eliminate cash bail and decriminalize certain offenses are becoming disturbingly common in Washington and other blue states led by lawmakers farther to the left of Karl Marx. These so-called “reforms” are often implemented without any meaningful consideration of their impact on public safety.

狈辞迟听别惫别谤测听Democrat is on board yet

During a public hearing for House Bill 1125, State Rep. Lauren Davis, D-Shoreline, asked a pointed question of radical King County judge Veronica Galvan. The judge testified in favor of the bill, which Davis doesn’t support in its current form.

Davis did her homework and noted that Galvan recently and charged in the alleged disembowelment of a 14-year-old boy in Everett. It wasn’t the judge’s only dangerous mistake because Galvan is driven by an anti-prison ideology. Davis said she was skeptical of the bill because of actions from judges like Galvan.

“If I vote for this policy, and some of these incarcerated individuals are released and they do reoffend, I consider myself culpable,” Davis told Galvan. “So my question to you is how can I have confidence in granting more discretion to judicial officers when I already have concerns over some judges to assess dangerousness and prioritize public safety?”

Galvan responded in a somewhat snide tone, saying that not all judges will be perfect. She then complained that she doesn’t earn praise when she makes the right decision. It likely didn’t persuade Davis, who has emerged as a reasonable Democrat lawmaker on this issue.

Why do Washington Democrats keep fighting for criminals?

The push for such legislation raises a critical question: Why are certain lawmakers so intent on aiding criminals while neglecting the safety and well-being of victims and the general public?

The focus should be on supporting victims, ensuring justice is served, and maintaining safe communities 鈥� not on providing escape routes for those who have committed serious crimes because the criminal is lucky to be assigned a soft-on-crime judge to hear his or her petition for early release.

House Bill 1125 represents another perilous shift in our justice system, one that favors subjective assessments of activist judges over true accountability. While rehabilitation is an essential component of corrections, it should not come at the expense of public safety or justice for victims. When a dangerous criminal is in jail, their recidivism rate of creating more victims, out of Washingtonians walking around their neighborhoods, doesn’t exist.

Listen to The Jason Rantz Show on weekday afternoons from 3-7 p.m. on KTTH 770 AM (HD Radio 97.3 FM HD-Channel 3). Subscribe to the聽podcast here. Follow Jason on聽,听听听补苍诲听.