The worry of many is not what judges would do if the guidelines were invalidated, but the reaction of an increasingly conservative Congress.

Here's the scenario: Seeing its two-decade-old attempt to impose national consistency on criminal sentences dispatched by - yes - activist judges, Congress rewrites the criminal code with specific, mandatory prison terms for every offense.

If it sounds far-fetched, a lot of lawyers are not laughing. "Word is that some members [of Congress] already have the bills drafted," said a Philadelphia defense lawyer about a rewriting of the criminal code.

The fear is not unwarranted.

Having practiced for more than a decade in federal court pre-guidelines, and post-guidelines since their enactment, I personally would have liked to see them scrapped. I think yesterday's decision was a cop-out. Plus, I like the old way better where a judge pretty much had unfettered discretion as to the factors that could be considered in sentencing defendants.

The argument that the Guidelines reduced disparity in sentences is a myth, particularly in drug cases. The Guidelines give too much discretion to prosecutors. Through their charging decisions, prosecutors can determine the outcome of a sentence and there's li