War on Drugs

  • September 20, 2011
    Guest Post

    By Nkechi Taifa, senior policy analyst for the Open Society Policy Center. She will discuss drug policy reform during two panel discussions at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s Annual Legislative Conference this week.


    For a quarter of a century mandatory minimum sentences have resulted in egregiously severe and harsh punishments which often do not fit the crime, have racially disparate outcomes, increase overcrowding, and exacerbate prison costs. These sentences are the result of a war on drugs that has been disproportionately fought in Black and Latino communities. The impact of the war on drugs on individuals, families, and communities has been likened to a “new Jim Crow,” resulting in the mass incarceration and over-representation of people of color in the criminal justice system. 

    As a quick reminder: A mandatory minimum sentence is a prison term predetermined by Congress and automatically imposed for certain crimes, primarily drugs and firearms. It is the minimum penalty that a judge must impose. In most cases the sentence is at least five years, and often it is 10, 15, or 20 years or more, even for nonviolent first time offenders. 

    One of the problems with inflexible mandatory sentencing laws is that they are applied regardless of the role of the defendant and of other factors, which judges traditionally take into account for sentencing, such as the history and characteristics of the defendant and the likelihood of rehabilitation. 

  • August 24, 2011
    Guest Post

    This post is part of an ACSblog symposium in honor of the unveiling of the Martin Luther King Jr. National MemorialThe author, Robert Rooks, is the National Criminal Justice Director for the NAACP.


    This weekend hundreds of thousands will travel to Washington, D.C. to witness the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr Memorial dedication service. Millions more will follow closely via Facebook, Twitter, foursquare and television. Inevitably, those watching this historic moment will ask themselves, have we become the nation Dr. King talked about in his speeches? Are we the promised land? Or do we have a ways to go?

    Some will conclude that America has achieved equality because of President Obama, but I would argue the war on drugs shows we have a long way to go. After forty years of the war on drugs, America continues to have laws that stratify society based on race and class and continues to ignore Dr. King’s lessons on justice, compassion and love.

    My favorite quote from Dr. King speaks to the heart of the problem with America’s criminal justice system.  "Power without love is reckless and abusive, and love without power is sentimental and anemic. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice, and justice at its best is power correcting everything that stands against love."

    America’s criminal justice system is reckless and discriminate. America has five percent of the world’s population but 25 percent of the world’s prisoners. Blacks are incarcerated at four to five times the rate of whites for drug crimes, even though the majority of those who use and sell drugs are white. The majority of those incarcerated are people who have a history with mental health and substance abuse.

  • June 14, 2011
    Guest Post

    By Inimai M. Chettiar, Policy Counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. Ms. Chettiar serves as national legislative counsel to achieve smart criminal justice reform in states across the country. She has published scholarship on the use of economic analysis to promote laws advancing social welfare. This month, the ACLU has dedicated a blog series discussing the failed war on drugs.


    All our lives we have been taught that when someone uses or sells drugs, justice dictates that he or she should go to prison. We are taught that those who commit drug crimes are a threat to society, either because they want to turn others into addicts or steal from them for drug money; they belong in prison, safely away from law abiding citizens. But lately, newspapers and legislatures are abuzz with a message that is just the opposite: relying less on prison sanctions for drug crimes can actually increase public safety.

    The rhetoric and policies of the so-called war on drugs may be the cultural norm, but they aren’t always sensible. Our lawmakers should have listened to Milton Friedman, who from the start warned that the drug war would result in disastrous consequences for inner city neighborhoods with the only benefit being a highly profitable black market for drug cartels.

    This Friday, June 17th, marks 40 years from the date President Richard Nixon first declared  a “war on drugs,” referencing the policies he implemented in the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act. The progeny of this Act have left us with a convoluted maze of billions of pages of federal and state criminal codes that dole out stiff, lengthy sentences for drug crimes. The proffered goal: to reduce and ultimately end the production, distribution, and use of drugs labeled “illicit.”

    So what’s the verdict 40 years later? Have we won the war on drugs?

  • May 11, 2010

    The Obama administration today announced a shift in priorities for combating drug use.

    "The Strategy focuses on treatment - because despite our best efforts some people do become drug users," Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) Director Gil Kerlikowski says in a video statement. "We need to intervene early, to prevent use from progressing to addiction. We need to increase accessibility to evidence‐based treatments to help those in trouble. And we must promote comprehensive recovery support."

    The new strategy follows other changes in the federal approach to drug policy under the Obama administration, including deprioritizing medical marijuana prosecutions, pushing to end the sentencing disparity for powder- and crack-cocaine possession, and repealing a ban on publicly funded needle exchanges.

  • May 4, 2010
    Guest Post

    By Marc Mauer, Executive Director, The Sentencing Project & Author, Race to Incarcerate

    In the midst of often rancorous debate on Capitol Hill, growing bipartisanship is developing in an area that many would have thought extremely unlikely: criminal justice reform. Just last week legislation to establish a national commission to examine the criminal justice system was introduced in the House by the unlikely mix of liberal Democrats William Delahunt and Marcia Fudge along with conservative Republicans Darrell Issa and Tom Rooney. The legislation mirrors a bipartisan bill, introduced by Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA), passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this year. At the time of the bill's introduction, Sen. Webb wrote, "With so many of our citizens in prison compared to the rest of the world, there are only two possibilities. Either we are home to the most evil people on earth or we are doing something different - and vastly counterproductive. Obviously, the answer is the latter."

    The criminal justice commission bill comes at a time when significant reform to federal sentencing policy may become a reality for the first time since the enactment of a slew of mandatory sentencing policies in the 1980s. Legislation to reform the longstanding and notorious differential in sentencing between crack and powder cocaine was passed by unanimous consent in the Senate in March and is likely to gain similar support in the House. Under current law, sale of 500 grams of powder cocaine results in a mandatory five-year prison term. But for crack cocaine, possessing as little as five grams carries the same five-year penalty. This 100:1 quantity disparity ratio has been broadly criticized for leading to large-scale prosecutions of low-level crack cocaine offenders, 80 percent of whom have been African American.