When President Obama this week he wasn’t so much expressing a daring viewpoint as putting himself at the head of a growing coalition of both the political left and right that has been saying the same thing for some time.
The system of mandatory minimum sentences goes too far, these critics argue. In too many cases, it strips federal judges of all discretion and results in sentences that fail any reasonable test of fairness.
Meanwhile, the critics assert, certain time-honored correctional practices, such as solitary confinement, have been deployed too often given the risk that they will inflict emotional damage on those who endure them.
The critique is right on all counts.
Tough federal sentencing laws did not of course appear out of nowhere. They were a response to a surge in crime and a sense that some judges could not be trusted to exercise discretion, that they were giving criminals a slap on the wrist rather than true punishment.
But as the president noted, the pendulum swung too far, with disturbing results.
“In far too many cases, the punishment simply does not fit the crime,” he said. “If you’re a low-level drug dealer … you owe some debt to society. You have to be held accountable and make amends. But you don’t owe 20 years. You don’t owe a life sentence.”
Some members of Congress feel the same way, and have been working toward a legislative reform. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. — whom Obama praised for his efforts on criminal justice reform — is sponsoring a bill with Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., that would keep the minimum sentences in the law but make them more advisory than mandatory.
Judges would be able to impose lower sentences in certain cases, “where the sentence violates standards for fair punishment laid out elsewhere in U.S. law” or to “address any disparities in the way individuals in the same case are being sentenced,” among other reasons.
The primary targets, clearly, are the sentences for certain non-violent offenders who are unlikely to pose a threat to public safety.
Paul is a longtime critic of mandatory minimum sentences and calls them a “major culprit in our unbalanced and often unjust drug laws.” And while most senators may not join him in that rhetoric, a growing number fortunately seem to share his sense that a major reset is needed.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
