News / FJP Releases

April 14, 2025 (Washington, D.C.) — Today, Fair and Just Prosecution (FJP) and four other organizations submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Bowe v. United States, urging the Court to ensure that people have a meaningful opportunity to challenge their convictions.

The brief highlights how the Eleventh Circuit’s application of an unfounded procedural bar prevents federal prisoners like petitioner Michael Bowe from seeking relief from plainly unlawful sentences, relief that has been made available in other federal circuits. Mr. Bowe is being treated differently than similarly situated federal prisoners merely because he was convicted in a district court within the Eleventh Circuit, as opposed to the Fourth, Sixth, or Ninth Circuits. 

FJP Acting Co-Executive Director Amy Fettig Released the Following Statement on the Case:

“Public safety depends on a justice system people can trust — one that’s grounded in truth, fairness, and accountability. That trust breaks down when courts leave people behind bars for arbitrary and fundamentally unjust reasons. Michael Bowe is currently in prison based on a classification that no longer applies to his convictions, yet the Eleventh Circuit won’t even let him argue for his freedom. A justice system that keeps any person unlawfully in prison due to its refusal to correct past mistakes is a broken system.”

BACKGROUND

Michael Bowe is serving a ten-year federal prison sentence for a crime that courts have since determined does not legally exist. In 2009, Mr. Bowe pled guilty to discharging a firearm during a “crime of violence,” which is a charge that required the government to prove he committed certain underlying violent crimes. However, in the years since Mr. Bowe’s conviction, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the crimes forming the basis of his sentence — attempted and conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery — do not qualify as “crimes of violence” under federal law.

Despite this ruling, Mr. Bowe has been repeatedly denied the ability to challenge his unlawful sentence due to a statutory provision misapplied by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals given Congressional intent in passing the law.

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) places strict requirements on state and federal prisoners who pursue post-conviction relief in federal courts. The law was intended to encourage finality in convictions and speed the appeals process by requiring state and federal prisoners to diligently pursue their claims. AEDPA also restricts the ability of prisoners to file second or successive petitioners in federal courts. 

Mr. Bowe complied with both the spirit and text of the law in filing a successive motion to vacate his unlawful conviction and sentence: he acted diligently, filed promptly, and relied on new constitutional rulings from the Supreme Court that clearly undermine his conviction. Yet the Eleventh Circuit applied a procedural bar intended only for state prisoners to block Mr. Bowe from presenting his claim. Despite the clear statutory text, numerous Circuits are barring legally innocent federal prisoners like Mr. Bowe from filing successive motions to vacate. This arbitrary restriction—misapplied by circuit courts and not intended by Congress—must be corrected by this Court. As the brief explains, the Eleventh Circuit’s approach creates a perverse incentive: punishing people for asserting their rights quickly while rewarding those who wait years before filing.