home

Straightjackets for Judges

The New York Times weighs in on the folly of Congress' passage of the Feeney Amendment to the Amber Alert bill:
Just when we should be reducing unfairness in the nation's criminal justice system, Congress is moving in the opposite direction. Last week, lawmakers approved provisions that will prevent federal judges from using their discretion to give prison terms that are shorter than those prescribed by federal sentencing guidelines. The changes were tagged on to the Amber Alert bill that creates a national notification system for child abductions. The amendment will further confine the already sharply limited choices federal judges now have in sentencing.... Chief Justice William Rehnquist, hardly a coddler of criminals, warned members of Congress that limiting judicial sentencing power along these lines "would seriously impair the ability of courts to impose just and responsible sentences." But egged on by the Bush Justice Department, legislators refused to heed that advice, or even hold hearings. Under the guise of protecting children, Congress has badly undermined fairness and judicial independence. It has also upset the balance between uniform sentencing and individualized punishment that the system of sentencing guidelines was supposed to deliver.
The Washington Post Sunday had an editorial aptly titled, Nation Behind Bars.

Last year, for the first time in American history, the states and the federal government -- in jails and in prisons around the country -- had more than 2 million people behind bars, according to Justice Department statistics. Those locked up included 1.3 percent of all males in this country, 4.8 percent of all black males -- and a shocking 11.8 percent of black men between the ages of 20 and 34. The dramatic rise in the prison population has created a nation of prisoners within American society.

The U.S. rate of incarceration is the highest in the world; according to data from the British Home Office, the only countries with rates close to it are the Cayman Islands and Russia.

....The logic of tougher sentencing regimes and extended prison terms for drug offenders has long since become circular. When crime persists in the face of tougher sentences, many policymakers conclude that the sentences need to be tougher still. The cycle has proven enormously difficult to break, in large measure because popular sentiment makes the tough-on-crime posture politically irresistible. But keeping an ever-growing number of people locked up has huge costs: the financial costs associated with maintaining a nation of inmates, the human costs in the wrecked lives of those who could have been rehabilitated under different policies, the costs to society when people are finally released after years of prison socialization. There are also moral costs -- hard to define yet real nonetheless. For the incarceration rate reflects on some level the rate at which a society gives up on its members. And 2 million is a huge number to give up on.
States around the country are considering releasing prisoners early and revising laws to reduce penalties for non-violent crimes due to budget constraints. Even Texas is considering bills to reduce penalties for drug offenders.

Meanwhile, Attorney General Ashcroft continues to march to the beat of his solo drum, against the tide of wisdom and fairness.

< Immigrant Groups to Sue Ashcroft and Justice Department | Jefferson Muzzle Awards >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort: