A federal prisoner sought compassionate release based substantially on the disparity between his sentence and the lower sentence he might receive under a later, nonretroactive change in sentencing law. The Supreme Court held that a nonretroactive amendment cannot, by itself, qualify as an extraordinary and compelling reason for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). Treating the legislative decision not to make a change retroactive as the reason for retroactive relief would circumvent the limits Congress imposed. Courts may still consider other qualifying circumstances and the statutory sentencing factors, but the legal disparity alone is insufficient. The judgment was affirmed.