Final answer:
Reform opinions such as abolishing plea bargaining, establishing guidelines for both plea bargaining and sentencing, and abolishing parole are indeed designed to limit judicial discretion; this is true. These measures aim for a justice system that is more consistent and less dependent on individual judgment.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that reform opinions such as abolishing plea bargaining, establishing plea bargaining guidelines, developing sentencing guidelines, and abolishing parole are designed to limit judicial discretion is True. These measures are intended to create a more predictable and standardized legal system by reducing the personal judgement and flexibility afforded to judges and other members of the judicial system.
For instance, plea bargaining allows for cases to be settled more quickly and with a guaranteed outcome, which can prevent the uncertainty of a trial. Developing sentencing guidelines and abolishing parole aim to create consistent punishments and reduce the likelihood of early release, which also removes some of the discretion traditionally held by parole boards and judges.