by Blue Views staff
I’m going to ask you to put yourself in someone else’s shoes for a few minutes. You’re 22 years old and have been down on your luck. The economy is tough, you’ve had some issues with the law, but nothing serious – fighting, drinking – in the grand scheme of things, not a huge deal. You have, however, gotten hooked up with some friends who are a bit more hardcore.
One day, they announce that they’re planning to break into a house. Despite the ribbing you will get, you tell them you don’t want to be involved. They give you a hard time and finally convince you just to be the driver. The house will be empty – the people are on vacation. What’s the harm?
Sitting in the car outside the house that night, you suddenly hear gunshots. The house wasn’t empty after all. Your friends run out, and you drive away. You didn’t even know that they owned guns. Weeks later, you’re arrested.
Until this year, it didn’t matter that you never went inside, never touched a gun, never meant for anyone to get hurt. You would have been convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to die in prison, the same as someone who knowingly plots and carries out a killing.
I know your first thought – that’s a far-fetched scenario; it isn’t likely to happen. But here’s the thing – a similar event really happened. The case that started all of this (Commonwealth v. Lee) bears a striking similarity. Derek Lee was upstairs in the house when his partner shot the homeowner in the basement. He had no intention of hurting anyone, but he was sentenced to the same life without parole as his partner, the actual killer.
The law changed in March 2026 when the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decided that a mandatory sentence of life without parole for all second-degree murder convictions violated the Pennsylvania Constitution. And this is where the problems begin.
To be clear, both the driver in our fictional scenario and Derek Lee in real life are guilty. They were willing participants in the commission of a felony and should therefore serve time in prison. The question is – how much time? The same as the person who pulled the trigger? The PA Supreme Court said no, but didn’t provide new guidelines (that’s not their job). They gave the legislature until late July to rewrite the rules to address sentencing.
Pennsylvania Republicans say that you should face a mandatory 35-plus years in prison. It doesn’t matter that you were outside in the car (or on a different floor of the house). You were an accomplice to murder, however unwittingly. There is almost no wiggle room in the sentencing requirements.
And that is the crux of the problem. Republicans want to paint all situations the same and throw the same book at everyone (with a few very limited exceptions). Democrats want sentencing guidelines which take extenuating circumstances into account. It’s important to note that Democrats do still want sentencing guidelines, including the same maximum of life without parole that Republicans want. They aren’t calling for a “Get out of Jail Free” card for anyone. They want the guidelines to be developed by the bipartisan Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing [i] – not just some politicians (Democrats included) looking to score political points for being “tough on crime.” The commission is mostly judges and legal professionals, with some members appointed by politicians from both parties. Democrats argue that these legal experts are best suited to make such important decisions.
Because the PA Supreme Court’s July deadline has passed, there are currently no sentencing guidelines at all. Courts can apply whatever sentences they feel appropriate. This leads to a bigger problem – people in similar situations could receive vastly different sentences. No one on either side of the aisle wants this. It is practically guaranteed to cause problems as it plays out. Lawsuits are going to happen if people receive different jail times (or even no jail time) for cases that are nearly identical.
The question facing us is – do we want the actual facts to drive sentencing, or do we want everyone to be tarred with the same brush – regardless of the facts? Remember, despite all the rhetoric being thrown around, no one – Republicans or Democrats – wants violent criminals out on our streets. Neither side is proposing an automatic release of violent criminals who are already in prison or who may be incarcerated in the future. The PA Parole Board still controls prisoner release. The question is whether we want people in prison for a term absurdly disproportionate to the facts of the case.
On November 3rd, think about this. Vote for a fact-based reality.
Connect with us on Signal