Garner, Former Chairman of the State Board of Pardons and Paroles of Georgia v. Jones — Scalia, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Scalia, concurring in part, agrees that the Georgia Board’s discretionary change in the frequency of parole‑eligibility hearings does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause and would reverse the Eleventh Circuit’s decision without remand. He emphasizes that parole is a matter of grace, not a guaranteed entitlement, and that the Board’s discretion over both timing and substance is inherent in the system. The dissent by Justice Souter argues the opposite, contending that the change creates a substantial risk of increased punishment and therefore violates the Clause.