made by the parties for alternative sentences, ... when a defendant raises a particular, nonfrivolous argument in seeking a lower sentence, the record must reflect both that the district judge considered the defendant’s argument and that the judge explained the basis for rejecting it. United States v. Gapinski, 561 F.3d 467, 474 (6th Cir.2009) (internal quotation marks, citations, and alterations omitted). Davy’s argument for a policy-based variance was “nonfrivolous” and required a response from the district court. Rita, 551 U.S. at 357, 127 S.Ct. 2456; Gapinski, 561 F.3d at 474. In this circuit, we recognize the ability of a district court to vary based on a policy disagreement with any aspect of the Guidelines. See, e.g., United States v. Brooks, 628 F.3d 791, 799-800 (6th Cir.2011) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Camacho-Arellano, 614 F.3d
holding that sentencing judges can vary from guidelines ranges based on policy considerations including disagreements with the guidelines recognizing district courts ability to vary from guidelines based on policy disagreement with sentencing range in cases involving child pornography holding a district court has authority to vary from the crack cocaine guidelines based on a policy disagreement with them italics omitted holding that sentencing courts may vary  based solely on policy considerations including disagreements with the guidelines holding district courts are entitled to vary from the guidelines based on a policy disagreement with those guidelines