Mandatory Minimum Sentences

"Mandatory minimum sentencing" refers to laws "which force judges to deliver fixed sentences to individuals convicted of a crime, regardless of culpability or other mitigating factors" (link).  The stated goal of mandatory minimum sentences is to deter drug traffickers and reduce the supply of illegal drugs.

While mandatory minimum sentences have existed in the United States since 1790, they have not had the impact they do now until the last two decades.

The 1970 Comprehensive Drug Abuse and Control Act concluded that mandatory minimum sentencing laws were not serving the purpose of deterring drug offenders.  This led to the repealing of most mandatory minimum sentence laws.

• 1987, Minnesota: a law was passed in which possession of three grams of crack cocaine was punishable by 48 months in prison.  Ten grams of powdered cocaine only earned an offender twelve months in prison, however. 
  
• 1988, Minnesota: 100% of crack offenders who were sentenced were African-American.  66% of powdered cocaine users were white.  Institutionalized racism?
  
• Possible parallel:  The banning of Opium during the late 1800s not as a result of its being dangerous, but as a way to ensure the Chinese immigrant population's disenfranchisement.  (link)
• The federal 1986 Anti Drug Abuse Act provided for the reinstatement of minimum penalties for drug offenses.  Among other things, this established the 5 gram limit for crack cocaine.  Five grams or lower had a maximum sentence of 1 year in prison, and ANYTHING above 5 grams earned the offender a minimum of 5 years in prison.  In contrast, one could possess up to 500 grams of powdered cocaine before the five year minimum sentence took effect.  No rationale was given for their choices of amounts.  This is known as the 100:1 crack-powder disparity.  

• 1995:  Sentencing Commission unanimously recommends the crack-powder disparity be abolished (1-1 ratio instituted).  Congress rejected this.  The Sentencing Commission adjusted its recommendation, but it was still not approved by congress

1990 study by the National Institute on Drug Abuse found that whites form 77% of illegal drug users.  African Americans only make up 15% of this group.

"Despite the apparent ubiquity of America's drug problem, economically disadvantaged racial minority groups provide the bulk of the raw material for the drug war" (Gaines and Kraska, 1997).

In 1991, 59% of federal crack cases qualified for mandatory minimum sentencing.  This number would go down to 3% if the powder cocaine standard was applied.  27% of powder cocaine cases qualified for mandatory minimum sentencing, but under the crack standard, 76% would have qualified.

A person could divide a one pound supply of cocaine into 64 bags containing enough product to produce a seven gram unit of crack.  The distributor would not be subject to mandatory minimum sentencing laws, but the people he sold the cocaine to would be.

There are instances of undercover law enforcement officers attempting to persuade individuals to buy enough quantity to trigger the mandatory minimum.  Also reported are instances of police waiting for participants in the drug trade to have purchased or sold enough drugs to trigger the mandatory minimum.

Sullum on undercover law enforcement agents:  "Police do not commit murder to prevent murder; they do not steal to prevent theft; but they do buy drugs to prevent people from buying drugs, a situation that puts them above the law and encourages corner cutting" (2006).

The federal mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines provides for "downward departures" (sentence reductions) for those willing and able to provide "substantial assistance" (information on other drug transactions and dealers).  Because of this, people higher up in drug trafficking organizations sometimes end up with sentences less harsh than those below them.  This is due to their ability to provide more information regarding the drug trade to the state.

Does punishing low level members more harshly than high level members contribute to the goals of deterring drug traffickers and reducing the supply of illegal drugs?

UPDATES

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that, "federal judges can impose shorter sentences than under federal sentencing guidelines for crimes related to crack cocaine, making those sentences more equal to those for crimes involving powder cocaine. Justices upheld more lenient sentences imposed by judges who rejected federal sentencing guidelines as too harsh." (link)

Both the Senate and House of Representatives have introduced bills which seek to remedy the crack-powder disparity.  One of these bills, Joseph Biden's s 711, would raise the amount of crack required for minimum sentencing to that of powder cocaine.  (link)

Low level players in a drug business discuss "the game" through the game of chess.  Pay careful attention to the part at the end where they discuss the role of the "pawns."  This shows the harsher penalties received by low level members of the organization.  From HBO's The Wire.  link

RELATED RESEARCH

• He sought to uncover the importance of plea bargaining in sentence disparity, and the ways in which it is different across different races
• Sidanius writes, " Defendants whose cases go to trial tend to receive more severe sentences than defendants who engage in plea bargaining. Whites tend to plea bargain to a greater extent than Blacks” (274). 
  
• Significance to Mandatory Minimum Sentencing?  Does white defendants engaging in plea bargaining more often guarantee that they will not be subject to mandatory minimums?

• " The spectacularly harsh penalties prescribed for the possession and sale of crack cocaine also work to the disadvantage of black drug abusers. Crack's low price and ease of distribution make it a drug of choice in poor urban neighborhoods where African Americans predominate. Users of powder cocaine, from which crack is derived, are likely to be more affluent and white...Federal law punishes possession and sale of one gram of crack as harshly as possession of 100 grams of powder" (837).