characterize the district court’s decision as being based upon a policy disagreement with the Sentencing Commission. The district court expressed disagreement with the decision to grant Wilson’s § 3582 motion in what the district court viewed as the absence of an appropriate assessment of the § 3553(a) factors specific to him that might counsel against a reduction, but the district court did not appear to question the policy underlying the general reduction in sentences. See R. 1623 (Tr. of April 15, 2015 Hearing at 18:2-24) (Page ID # 7326). In any event, contrary to Wilson’s argument, Appellant Br. at 11, we have held that district courts may base sentences on policy disagreements with a sentencing guideline. See United States v. Camacho-Arellano, 614 F.3d 244, 248-49 (6th Cir.2010) (<HOLDING>) (quoting Spears v. United States, 555 U.S.
holding a district court has authority to vary from the crack cocaine guidelines based on a policy disagreement with them italics omitted holding that our prior rule that a district court lacked authority to premise a variance on disagreement with the policy of a guideline does not survive the supreme courts decision in kimbrough v united states 552 us 85 128 sct 558 169 led2d 481 2007  which was a recognition of district courts authority to vary from the  guidelines based on policy disagreement with them holding district courts are entitled to vary from the guidelines based on a policy disagreement with those guidelines recognizing district courts ability to vary from guidelines based on policy disagreement with sentencing range in cases involving child pornography holding that sentencing courts may vary  based solely on policy considerations including disagreements with the guidelines