home

Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker

By Jeralyn, Section Booker/Blakely
Posted on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 09:33:40 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Drug War Chronicles reports that despite the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Booker which made the federal sentencing guidelines advisory rather than mandatory, drug sentences are getting longer.

In a report on post-Booker sentences issued last week, the US Sentencing Commission found that most judges in most cases continued to sentence in accord with the now "advisory" guidelines. According to the report, about 67,000 people were sentenced in the federal courts in the past year, and their average sentence of 58 months was actually higher than the 57-month average of the previous year. Sentences below the guidelines have increased, but only minimally, from a little over 9% to just over 15%.

Both Law Prof Doug Berman of Sentencing Law and Policy and I are quoted in the article.

< Moussaoui Judge to Let Case Go to Jury, Moussaoui to Testify | Wash. Post Conservative Blogger Resigns Amid Plagiarism Allegations >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker | 7 comments (7 topical)
    Re: Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 12:01:08 PM EST
    Where's the problem here? The intent of Booker, as I read it, was not to reduce the length of sentences but to restore the separation of powers. The problem with "mandatory minimums" was not that they resulted in sentences that were too long for some crimes but that it represented an attempt by the legislature to preempt the judiciary from exercising its constitutionally proscribed duty. As sentencing decisions have been restored to the judicial branch, I see no problem here. Constitutionally, at least.

    Re: Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 12:09:02 PM EST
    The intent of Booker, as I read it, was not to reduce the length of sentences but to restore the separation of powers. The problem with "mandatory minimums" was not that they resulted in sentences that were too long for some crimes but that it represented an attempt by the legislature to preempt the judiciary from exercising its constitutionally proscribed duty.
    Booker did not nullify mandatory minimums.

    Re: Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 12:27:16 PM EST
    I misspoke. It invalidated mandatory sentencing guidelines, making them advisory only. Better?

    Re: Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Mar 24, 2006 at 12:27:19 PM EST
    As sentencing decisions have been restored to the judicial branch, I see no problem here. Constitutionally, at least.
    The problem is AG Gonzales does not like advisory guidelines.
    As a former judge, I know well the difficulties of certain issues such as sentencing, and I admire the men and women on our federal bench. But I fear it is inevitable over time that, with so many different individual judges involved, exercising their own individual discretion, in so many different jurisdictions, even greater disparities among sentences will occur under a system of advisory guidelines.
    Gonzales is pushing mandatory minimums for all federal crimes. He is hoping that, "...greater disparities among sentences will occur..." to prove his point and further his agenda.

    Re: Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker (none / 0) (#5)
    by aahpat on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 09:08:12 AM EST
    Longer sentences are a success of the drug war. The issues enumerated in the New York Times article earlier this week, "Plight Deepens for Black Men, Studies Warn", and the editorial today 'Go Away: You Can't Vote', all are part of this same Jim Crow "system". "[President Nixon] emphasized that you have to face the fact that the whole problem is really the blacks. The key is to devise a system that recognizes this while not appearing to." H.R Haldeman diary. The drug war is that system. The people who support and maintain this para-military wing of William Bennett's culture war, even accept well funded stateless terrorist armies as acceptable collateral damage of the drug war. Our democracy is worth even less to them than our national security. My essays on these issues: Go Away: You Can't Vote Black American suffrage is the enemy Plight of disconnected black youths worsens Street crime and terrorism fostered by drug prohibition Stateless terrorism is collateral damage of real war America; democracy incarcerated How America's right wing has successfully subverted our democracy

    Re: Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker (none / 0) (#6)
    by Dadler on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 11:57:09 AM EST
    Chase, Do you drink? Just curious.

    Re: Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Mar 25, 2006 at 03:52:19 PM EST
    Do I drink? Yes, yes I do. Now I'm curious as to why you ask.

    Drug Sentences Getting Longer, Despite Booker | 7 comments (7 topical)