US · guidance
Justice Manual § 7-3.500
Sentencing
Sentencing recommendations in antitrust cases are based on an individualized assessment under the Principles of Federal Prosecution, JM 9-27.730, and any other applicable Department policies.
In antitrust cases, sentencing recommendations that are consistent with the U.S. Sentencing Commission Guidelines for antitrust violations, U.S.S.G. § 2R1.1, generally reflect an appropriate balance of the factors in JM 9-27.730, though an individualized assessment in a particular case may lead to the conclusion that a sentence above or below the advisory guidelines range would be more appropriate. Prosecutors may make such recommendations with supervisory approval, JM 9-27.730.
An individualized assessment usually counsels in favor of incarceration for individual defendants because of the importance of general deterrence in criminal antitrust cases and because these crimes typically cause serious economic harm. The United States Sentencing Guidelines state that “in very few cases will the guidelines not require that some confinement be imposed,” U.S.S.G. § 2R.1.1 (background), and that “[i]t is the intent of the Commission that alternatives such as community confinement not be used to avoid imprisonment of antitrust offenders,” id., Application Note 5.
History
[updated June 2022]
Provenance
- Source
- justice.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-20
- Edition
- jm-2026-09-20
- Content hash
74f886c05dc10263fc7cc3784ea8cb83042c34215182a269991d117e4ce60ec9
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.