A professional who deliberately defrauds clients should lose their license even after full repayment and genuine remorse. In other words, professional discipline protects the public and can also express condemnation independent of criminal punishment.

A commander responsible for war crimes should face punishment even if prosecution complicates a peace agreement. In other words, peace agreements sometimes offer amnesty or reduced punishment in exchange for ending conflict.

A repeat violent offender may deserve a long prison sentence even when rehabilitation appears unlikely. In other words, this scenario separates deserved punishment and confinement intended to prevent further harm from confidence in rehabilitation.

A public official who knowingly sells decisions for bribes should serve prison time rather than receive only restitution and a ban from office. In other words, restitution returns illicit gains; a ban from office prevents future public service.

A juvenile who commits a serious assault should be offered intensive treatment, restitution, and supervised reintegration rather than automatically being sentenced as an adult. In other words, a restorative sentence can include confinement or supervision while emphasizing treatment, repair, and reintegration.

A company that causes major pollution should be required to repair the damage, compensate communities, and submit to monitoring rather than rely mainly on punitive fines. In other words, remediation repairs environmental damage; monitoring verifies future compliance.

A school response to serious student violence should include victim participation, treatment, and a safety plan rather than rely only on exclusion. In other words, victim participation must be voluntary and can occur without face-to-face contact.

A truth commission may offer reduced punishment for full disclosure and victim reparations after a civil conflict. In other words, truth commissions investigate patterns of abuse and may trade reduced punishment for disclosure, acknowledgment, and reparations.

A constitutional court should strike down a voter-approved amnesty for officials who committed torture because some offenses require proportionate punishment. In other words, the court would cancel an amnesty approved by voters because torture is treated as an offense for which some punishment is always required.

A person convicted of serious assault should receive a shorter custodial sentence followed by intensive restorative supervision when strong evidence shows that this reduces repeat violence more effectively. In other words, a custodial sentence is time in jail or prison; restorative supervision can include treatment, restitution, victim participation, close monitoring, and a safety plan after release.

The death penalty should remain available for exceptionally aggravated murder. In other words, some murders are so serious that execution can be a deserved punishment rather than merely a way to prevent future harm.

A person who repeatedly sexually abuses a child deserves a severe prison sentence even when treatment could substantially reduce the risk of reoffending. In other words, punishment may be required because of the gravity of the wrong, not only because confinement is needed for public safety.

A person convicted of nonviolent drug distribution should ordinarily receive treatment and supervised reintegration rather than a long prison sentence. In other words, reducing addiction, repairing harm, and preventing future offending should matter more than imposing years of confinement for its own sake.

Even some people convicted of murder should have a realistic possibility of release after decades in prison if they demonstrate profound rehabilitation and no longer pose a serious danger. In other words, accountability for murder need not always require imprisonment until death when genuine change can be shown.