Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Richard Pickus v. United States Board of Parole, 543 F.2d 240 (1976)

Citation
Richard Pickus v. United States Board of Parole, 543 F.2d 240 (1976)
Parent Document
Richard Pickus v. United States Board of Parole, 543 F.2d 240 (1976)
Effective Date
1976-06-09

Other Sections in This Document (76)

Full Text

1,034 chars
At least for the prisoners’ rights involved here, providing the limited oral hearings proposed by petitioners would not remedy these disabilities; at best it would slightly broaden the comment base to include a few prisoners in three facilities willing to communicate their views verbally. There may be substantial advantages in adopting the procedures suggested by appellants since such oral hearings might serve to legitimate the parole rules in the eyes of prisoners, by giving at least some of them a more direct sense of participation in a policy process directly affecting their lives, and they could be structured to minimize disruption possibilities. This may call for the broad perspective of the Attorney General or the Deputy Attorney General rather than any narrow approach by the Parole Board or Bureau of Prisoners. It is not, however, for judicial mandate. We cannot hold that the balancing of private and government interests in this case requires displacing the procedures provided by Congress for policy development.