Pubdate: Fri, 28 Dec 2007
Source: Bend Weekly (OR)
Copyright: 2007 Bend Weekly News
Contact:  http://www.bendweekly.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/4514
Author: Marc H. Morial
Note: Marc H. Morial is president and chief executive officer of the 
National Urban League.
Cited: ACLU Drug Law Reform Project http://www.aclu.org/drugpolicy/
Referenced: Kimbrough v. United States http://drugsense.org/url/16DdEC4k
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?244 (Sentencing - United States)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/Sentencing+Commission
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/topic/crack+cocaine

RECENT CRACK COCAINE RULING BRINGS EARLY CHRISTMAS PRESENT

Christmas may have come early this year for the families of thousands 
of federal inmates with crack cocaine convictions, thanks to recent 
actions by the U.S. Supreme Court, President George W. Bush and the 
U.S. Sentencing Commission.

Back in the 1980s at the height of the crack epidemic in urban 
America, our nation's leaders labored under the misconception that 
the less expensive form of cocaine was much more addictive than its 
powder form, based on the testimony of an "expert" government 
witness. Distorted visions of crack babies overtaking inner cities 
danced in their heads, much to the detriment of fair and reasonable 
public policy.

As a result, Congress mandated harsher sentences for possession and 
distribution of crack. Under the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, those 
convicted of possessing 50 grams of the crack form of cocaine faced 
the same time behind bars as those convicted of possessing and/or 
selling 100 times as much of the power form. The result? Prisons 
swelled with petty criminals, a disproportionate number - as much as 
85 percent - black, not the drug kingpins of the world.

"For two decades, the United States has pursued, prosecuted and 
sentenced cocaine offenders in a way that borders on insanity - 
targeting petty criminals over serious drug dealers - while fostering 
contempt, instead of respect, for the policies that have sent tens of 
thousands to jail," writes Ellis Cose in a recent Newsweek online column.

In an early December 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court decided to give 
federal judges leeway in sentencing for crack convictions. The case 
in question involved a Desert Storm veteran named Derrick Kimbrough 
who was caught with crack, powder cocaine and a gun, offenses that 
should have sent him to prison for two decades or more.

Had he possessed only powder cocaine he would have faced half the 
sentence, concluded Judge Raymond Jackson, who presided over the 
trial, in giving Kimbrough a lesser-than-mandated 15-year sentence. 
An appeals court overruled Jackson's decision only to be reversed by 
the nation's highest court.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who authored the decision with John Paul 
Stevens, concluded that if powder and crack cocaine, the product of 
powder cocaine and baking soda crystallized, possess "the same 
physiological and psychotropic effects" then their users should be 
treated the same. The ruling deemed the 1986 law that created the 
disparate sentencing guidelines as "disproportionate and unjust."

Then, in a rare show of mercy a few hours after the decision, 
President George W. Bush cut the sentence of Michael D. Short, who 
had been convicted of aiding a crack-cocaine ring, one year short. It 
was one of only five commutations granted during his presidency. And 
a day later, the U.S. Sentencing Commission announced that up to 
20,000 federal inmates with crack convictions could be eligible for 
sentence reductions.

Graham Boyd, director of the American Civil Liberties Union drug 
reform project, described the recent court decision to Newsweek as 
the first since the mid-1980s "that actually talks about justice, 
that seems to have some blood in it."

The recent developments provide a welcomed relief for the families 
left behind as well as the incarcerated.  Karen Garrison, a 
Washington, D.C., mother of twin sons who were jailed in 1998 on 
crack offenses, is just one of many beneficiaries of the recent 
sentencing decision and subsequent developments. She told the 
Associated Press that she can now "just plan some kind of life" with 
her sons possibly on their way home.

Unfortunately, the U.S. Justice Department has sounded unwarranted 
alarms over the sentencing commission's decision, contending that it 
would result in unleashing thousands of "dangerous prisoners, many of 
them violent gang members" back into communities ill-equipped to 
handle them, according to a statement by acting Deputy Attorney 
General Craig S. Morford.

The department probably wouldn't be as worried over the prospect of a 
"mass" inmate release if Uncle Sam made prisoner re-entry programs a 
priority in the first place.

Overall, the latest developments toward eliminating sentencing 
disparities are likely to have a limited impact because the vast 
majority of drug convictions come out of state courts. According to 
the U.S. Bureau of Justice, they outnumbered those in federal courts 
by a ratio of 15-to-1 in 2004.

Nevertheless, the recent course of events is important.  What happens 
on the federal level could change the course of history at the state 
level. But first Congress must act to ensure that the disparities in 
sentencing are eliminated for good. The recent events, by no means, 
guarantee an end to harsh punishments for crack defendants. Our 
nation's lawmakers must give the justice system and its enforcers 
direct and clear guidance just like they did in the 1980s when they 
decided to hold small-time crack dealers to a more stringent standard 
than their drug kingpin counterparts.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake