In This Article
30-Second Summary
Headline link: Drug penalties raise question of racial bias
Background: The U.S. Sentencing Commission, Kimbrough v. the United States, and the Dept. of Justice
Historical Context: The 1986 and 1988 Anti-Drug Abuse acts
Opinions & Analysis: What legal analysts have been saying
Reference Materials: The differences between crack and powder cocaine
Subscribe to Health Updates
Supreme Court Approves Reduced Sentencing for Crack Offenses
by
findingDulcinea Staff
The decision will please advocates who say that the heavy punishments applied in connection with crack cocaine, in comparison with its powdered form, unfairly targeted racial minorities; opponents protest that drug dealers will be let off too lightly.
30-Second Summary
On Dec. 10, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 vote that judges may impose shorter terms for offenses related to crack cocaine.
The case in question concerned Derrick Kimbrough, a black veteran of the 1991 Gulf War who was sentenced to 15 years in prison for dealing both crack and powder cocaine.
U.S. District Judge Raymond A. Jackson, who tried the case, had described the recommended 19- to 22-year punishment as “ridiculous.”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in her majority decision, wrote, “A reviewing court could not rationally conclude that it was an abuse of discretion” to reduce Kimbrough’s sentence below the guideline level.
The court’s conclusion bolsters the stance of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, a federal panel that assesses the fairness of judicial punishments, which earlier this year ruled that sentences related to crack ought to be lessened to mirror those applied to cocaine. That resolution became effective on Nov. 1.
Prior to these reforms, the penalties associated with possessing or selling one gram of crack were the same as those for 100 grams of powder cocaine.
Because crack is cheaper than powder cocaine and more commonly found in poorer, inner-city neighborhoods, some observers inferred that the disparity in sentencing betrayed a racial bias in the legislature.
The Supreme Court decides tomorrow, Dec. 11, whether the new sentencing guidelines will be applied retroactively, a move that could potentially free 3,800 prisoners.
The court's decision did not directly address the question of racial bias.
The case in question concerned Derrick Kimbrough, a black veteran of the 1991 Gulf War who was sentenced to 15 years in prison for dealing both crack and powder cocaine.
U.S. District Judge Raymond A. Jackson, who tried the case, had described the recommended 19- to 22-year punishment as “ridiculous.”
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, in her majority decision, wrote, “A reviewing court could not rationally conclude that it was an abuse of discretion” to reduce Kimbrough’s sentence below the guideline level.
The court’s conclusion bolsters the stance of the U.S. Sentencing Commission, a federal panel that assesses the fairness of judicial punishments, which earlier this year ruled that sentences related to crack ought to be lessened to mirror those applied to cocaine. That resolution became effective on Nov. 1.
Prior to these reforms, the penalties associated with possessing or selling one gram of crack were the same as those for 100 grams of powder cocaine.
Because crack is cheaper than powder cocaine and more commonly found in poorer, inner-city neighborhoods, some observers inferred that the disparity in sentencing betrayed a racial bias in the legislature.
The Supreme Court decides tomorrow, Dec. 11, whether the new sentencing guidelines will be applied retroactively, a move that could potentially free 3,800 prisoners.
The court's decision did not directly address the question of racial bias.
Headline link: Drug penalties raise question of racial bias
The Supreme Court concurred with the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s decision of spring 2007 to reduce the disparity between sentencing for crack cocaine and the powdered form of the drug. In a 7-2 vote, the top court decreed that the 15-year sentence issued to Derrick Kimbrough, a veteran of the 1991 Gulf War, was an acceptable revision of the 19- to 22-year sentence suggested under federal guidelines.
Source: The New York Times
Background: The U.S. Sentencing Commission, Kimbrough v. the United States, and the Dept. of Justice
The U.S. Sentencing Commission, a governmental panel that sets guidelines for prison terms, put forward more lenient guidelines this past spring for future crack cocaine offenders. Judges and civil rights organizations have claimed that the stiffer penalties for the possession and sale of crack cocaine compared with those for the powdered form of the drug are inherently racist. Statistics show that the crack form is used more often by poorer minorities residing in the inner city, while powder cocaine is used more often by affluent whites. A dealer would have to trade 100 grams of powder cocaine to receive the same sentence as someone trading 1 gram of crack. Were new sentencing provisions to be applied retroactively, about 86 percent of the inmates who would be affected by the change are Black. The White House is against the retroactive application of the new sentence guidelines. Assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher wrote that the retroactive application of the bill “would jeopardize community safety and threatens to unravel the success we have achieved in removing violent crack offenders from high-crime neighborhoods.” In contrast, minority rights group NAACP Chairman Julian Bond said, "Making the amendment retroactive will … help repair the image of the sentencing guidelines in communities of color.”
Source: Contra Costa Times
A case was brought before the Supreme Court on Oct. 2 to determine whether the stiff penalties related to crack cocaine are constitutional. Derrick Kimbrough, an African-American veteran of the 1991 Gulf War, was given a 15-year prison term for selling both crack and powder cocaine in Norfolk, Va. Federal guidelines for sentencing crack-related crimes call for 19 to 22 years in prison, but U.S. District Judge Raymond A. Jackson said the higher end of the range was “ridiculous.” Those opposing more severe punishments for crack cocaine point out that, according to statistics, crack is often more of an inner-city, minority drug, while powder cocaine is generally used by the white upper-crust. The law in question was drafted in 1986 in a response to a rise in crack-related gang violence. The International Herald-Tribune writes, “The law includes what critics have called the 100-to-1 disparity: trafficking in 5 grams of crack cocaine carries a mandatory five-year prison sentence, but it takes 500 grams of cocaine powder to warrant the same sentence.”
Source: International Herald-Tribune
The Department of Justice is staunchly opposed to the retroactive application of lighter sentences for those found guilty of crimes related to crack cocaine, as explained in this letter to the U.S. Sentencing Commission. “Retroactive application of the proposed amendments would result in the unexpected early return of serious drug dealers (often with lengthy criminal histories) back into the community with the possibility of little or no re-entry preparation,” writes the Department of Justice. The letter is available online as a PDF.
Source: Federal Public Defender
Historical Context: The 1986 and 1988 Anti-Drug Abuse acts
The use of cocaine decreased dramatically after the 1914 instatement of the Harrison Act, which was based on a report given to the president stating that cocaine was “more dangerous than any other ‘habit-forming’ drug used in the United States.” That judgment seemed well grounded in the 1970s and 1980s, during a national surge in cocaine use. In reaction to the repeal of mandatory minimum sentencing in 1970, the Anti-Drug Abuse Act was passed in 1986. The act established two tiers of mandatory prison terms for first-time drug traffickers: a 5-year and a 10-year minimum sentence. In 1998, the act was amended to make crack cocaine the only drug with a mandatory minimum penalty for a first-time offender caught in possession.
Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission
Opinions & Analysis: What legal analysts have been saying
Paul Cassell, a former federal judge and chair of the federal judiciary’s Criminal Law Committee, wrote in November that this latest change in drug sentencing was “long overdue, and, to maximize its impact as an important first step toward restoring the credibility of federal drug sentences, it should be applied retroactively.” Cassell states that he finds that the 100-to-1 crack to powdered cocaine sentencing ratio was a fair response to gang violence seen in the 1980s. However, he writes that, over time, “It has had a disproportionate impact on minorities. About 80 percent of convicted crack dealers are African-American.”
Source: The Washington Post
The Sentencing Project, a think tank focusing on sentencing law and reform, sent a representative to testify before the Supreme Court. This spokesperson’s argument focused on four main points. First, most convicts imprisoned for crack-related offenses are among the older inmates, and are thus less prone to recidivism. Second, the government-run Sentencing Commission has been pushing for reform on crack sentencing since 1995, and believes that those who were since convicted should be able to take advantage of what the project sees as just legislation. Third, the project emphasized the issue of racial equity. Lastly, while there would be some initial costs vis-à-vis implementing the amendment retroactively, the money would be more than recouped by the lessening of prison expenditure.
Source: The Sentencing Project
A San Francisco Chronicle editorial of Nov. 5 considered Congress’s lack of action regarding past Sentencing Commission-backed reforms: “On [Nov. 1], on Thursday, Congress failed to reject a commission recommendation to reduce the average crack sentence from 121 months to 106 months, and so the recommendation became law. Doing nothing—that's what it took for Washington to finally enact a modest sentencing reform.”
Source: San Francisco Chronicle
Reference Materials: The differences between crack and powder cocaine
Cocaine is a substance extracted from the leaves of the coca plant, which is indigenous to the mountainous regions of Peru and Bolivia. Due to its popularity as a cash crop, it is now cultivated in Colombia, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Ecuador and Indonesia. Cocaine intended for street use in the United States is generally isolated and turned into cocaine hydrochloride in labs of the country of origin. As it passes from dealer to dealer, various powdery substances are added to increase the shipment’s value. Common additives are natural sugars and talc. In this salt form, cocaine is most commonly snorted or smoked. The salt form, as it is purer, is more expensive. Cocaine is often smoked in the form of “crack,” which is extracted from cocaine using baking soda and heat. The resulting waxy substance dries into rocks, which are easily traded on the street. When smoked, it produces effects more rapidly, but carries a greater risk of overdose. WebMD quotes a user: “Snorting coke is like driving 50 miles per hour. Smoking crack is like driving 150 miles per hour without brakes!"
Source: WebMD
Drug Enforcement Agency
Cocaine use has remained stable throughout this decade, according to the Drug Enforcement Agency. Its 2005 report stated that 6.9 percent of adults age 18–25 reported using cocaine in the past year. In another study conducted the same year, 8 percent of high school seniors reported using cocaine at some point in their lifetime. Between Jan. 12, 2005, and Sept. 30, 2005, 4,242 people were sentenced for powder cocaine-related crimes and 4,077 were sentenced in connection with crack.
Source: DEA
Source: DEA
Most Recent Beyond The Headlines
© 2019 Dulcinea Media, Inc.
