jimpeel
Member
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,94524,00.html
Anthony Kennedy argues against law that imposes mandatory minimum
Congress Not Likely to Change Sentencing Law
Tuesday, August 12, 2003
WASHINGTON — Congress may not be ready to change a law that appears to deter crime even as one Supreme Court justice argues that it's unfair.
Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy took a rare public policy stance on Saturday when he spoke to the American Bar Association and attacked the federal law that imposes mandatory minimum sentences and dictates federal sentencing guidelines.
"In my view, our resources are being misspent. Our punishments are too severe and our sentences are too long," Kennedy said.
"I can accept neither the necessity nor the wisdom of federal mandatory minimum sentences. In all too many cases, mandatory minimum sentences are unjust," he added.
Congress passed the law in 1988 to bring some sense of consistency to the way federal judges hand down their sentences, arguing that especially in drug cases, disparities were wide.
"You would get a very different sentence for the same offense depending upon which judge you appeared in front of — was he Maximum Mike or Minimum Mary — and where the offense was," said Paul Rosenzweig, senior legal research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
Since Congress intervened, prison populations have skyrocketed. Right now, roughly 2 million people are in jail or prison in this country, and the number of federal prison inmates has increased 41 percent since 1995.
Though many factors are to credit, the crime rate in the last decade has also gone down 50 percent.
Judges have long complained that they should be granted more leeway in sentencing, and those opposed to the guidelines say statistically, it can't be determined that the increase in the prison population decreased the crime rate.
But Rosenzweig said mandatory minimums have obviously worked.
"I think there's no doubt that increased incarceration has the effect of deterring other criminal conduct. Our entire system of justice is based upon the idea that deterrence works, that prison works," he said.
Adding to the tension between the three branches of government on this issue, the legislative branch — Congress — recently ordered the executive branch — in this case, the Justice Department —- to keep an eye on the judicial branch. As a result, Attorney General John Ashcroft last month sent a memo ordering federal prosecutors to report on federal judges who deviate from sentencing guidelines.
The ABA has vowed to study the matter further and make recommendations. But given the fact that many on the Hill believe that minimum sentences and sentencing guidelines are in part responsible for the reduction in crime, observers doubt that Congress will soon be interested in making any changes to the law.
Fox News' Brian Wilson contributed to this report.
Anthony Kennedy argues against law that imposes mandatory minimum
Congress Not Likely to Change Sentencing Law
Tuesday, August 12, 2003
WASHINGTON — Congress may not be ready to change a law that appears to deter crime even as one Supreme Court justice argues that it's unfair.
Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy took a rare public policy stance on Saturday when he spoke to the American Bar Association and attacked the federal law that imposes mandatory minimum sentences and dictates federal sentencing guidelines.
"In my view, our resources are being misspent. Our punishments are too severe and our sentences are too long," Kennedy said.
"I can accept neither the necessity nor the wisdom of federal mandatory minimum sentences. In all too many cases, mandatory minimum sentences are unjust," he added.
Congress passed the law in 1988 to bring some sense of consistency to the way federal judges hand down their sentences, arguing that especially in drug cases, disparities were wide.
"You would get a very different sentence for the same offense depending upon which judge you appeared in front of — was he Maximum Mike or Minimum Mary — and where the offense was," said Paul Rosenzweig, senior legal research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
Since Congress intervened, prison populations have skyrocketed. Right now, roughly 2 million people are in jail or prison in this country, and the number of federal prison inmates has increased 41 percent since 1995.
Though many factors are to credit, the crime rate in the last decade has also gone down 50 percent.
Judges have long complained that they should be granted more leeway in sentencing, and those opposed to the guidelines say statistically, it can't be determined that the increase in the prison population decreased the crime rate.
But Rosenzweig said mandatory minimums have obviously worked.
"I think there's no doubt that increased incarceration has the effect of deterring other criminal conduct. Our entire system of justice is based upon the idea that deterrence works, that prison works," he said.
Adding to the tension between the three branches of government on this issue, the legislative branch — Congress — recently ordered the executive branch — in this case, the Justice Department —- to keep an eye on the judicial branch. As a result, Attorney General John Ashcroft last month sent a memo ordering federal prosecutors to report on federal judges who deviate from sentencing guidelines.
The ABA has vowed to study the matter further and make recommendations. But given the fact that many on the Hill believe that minimum sentences and sentencing guidelines are in part responsible for the reduction in crime, observers doubt that Congress will soon be interested in making any changes to the law.
Fox News' Brian Wilson contributed to this report.
