Pubdate: Wed, 18 Apr 2012
Source: New York Times (NY)
Copyright: 2012 The New York Times Company
Contact: http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/lettertoeditor.html
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/298

ABIDING BY THE FAIR SENTENCING ACT

The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 addressed a gross inequity in federal 
sentences by reducing the disparity in punishment for a crime 
involving crack versus powdered cocaine. Previously, under a 1986 
law, 50 grams of crack (the weight of a candy bar) led to a mandatory 
minimum sentence of 10 years - the same sentence that applied to 
5,000 grams of powdered cocaine (enough to fill a brief case). A 
street dealer of crack cocaine often got a longer sentence than the 
major trafficker who sold the powdered cocaine made into crack. The 
new law cut the 100 to 1 ratio to 18 to 1 - not equalizing the 
penalties as it should have but markedly reducing the difference.

In two cases the Supreme Court heard on Tuesday, the issue is whether 
the sentencing law should apply to people who were convicted of 
cocaine crimes, but not yet sentenced, before it went into effect. 
The Justice Department initially argued that the new rule should 
apply only to crimes committed after the law was signed. To its 
credit, it changed its stance in July 2011, saying that since the 
goal of the law was to "rectify a discredited policy," the rule 
should apply to all defendants sentenced after the law's passage. 
This is clearly the right way to read the law, given the legislative 
history and the text, including the "emergency authority" for the 
United States Sentencing Commission to quickly put out guidelines. A 
rule of leniency requires that any ambiguity in a criminal statute be 
resolved in favor of defendants - especially when the old sentencing 
rules resulted in huge racial disparities, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor 
pointed out.

The majority of crack users are white and Hispanic, but, as the 
sentencing commission reported, in 2010 blacks made up more than 
three-fourths of those sentenced under federal crack cocaine laws. 
Most were low-level offenders. The high number of black defendants 
and the disparity in treatment of crack versus powdered cocaine led 
federal sentences for blacks to jump to almost 50 percent higher than 
for whites in 1990.

Congress, the Obama administration and many federal judges agree that 
there is a need to correct a grossly unfair and unjustifiable 
sentencing scheme. The justices should allow the 2010 law to apply to 
all defendants sentenced after its enactment.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom