Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (2007), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court confirmed that federal district judges utilize, in an advisory (not as law) fashion, Federal Sentencing Guidelines, in cases involving conduct related to possession, distribution, and manufacture of crack cocaine.

Under the statutes that define these respective crimes, Kimbrough faced a sentence of between 15 years and life in prison.

US District Court Judge Raymond Alvin Jackson observed that if Kimbrough's crime had involved powder cocaine only, his sentencing range would have been 97 to 106 months.

Relying on a prior opinion, the appellate court stated that any sentence that fell outside the Guidelines range was per se unreasonable if that sentence was based on a policy disagreement with the fact that crack cocaine offenses are punished more harshly than powder cocaine offenses.

The United States Supreme Court agreed to review the Fourth Circuit's reasoning in this case.

As the United States Sentencing Commission concluded in a 2002 report, a "major supplier of powder cocaine may receive a shorter sentence than a low-level dealer who buys powder from the supplier but then converts it into crack" cocaine.

In 1995, the Commission proposed reducing the ratio to 1-to-1 and adding other enhancements targeted at crack cocaine crimes involving violence.

Justice Thomas continued to assert his disapproval of the remedial holding in United States v. Booker.

"As a result of the Court's remedial approach, we are called upon to decide a multiplicity of questions that have no discernibly legal answers."

One such question, in his view, was whether the district courts are free to disregard a "categorical policy judgment reflected in the Guidelines" when imposing a "reasonable" sentence.