Mandatory minimum sentencing laws require harsh, automatic prison terms for those convicted of certain crimes, most often drug offenses. Congress enacted mandatory minimums in 1986 and toughened them in 1988 to apply to drug conspiracies and certain gun offenses. The sentence is determined solely by the weight and type of drug, or the presence of a firearm during a felony offense.

Congress enacted mandatory minimum sentencing laws to catch drug kingpins and deter drug sales and use. But the laws undermine the American tradition of justice by preventing judges from fitting the punishment to the individual’s role in the offense. Because of mandatory sentencing laws, the population of federal prisons has soared and they are filled with low-level, nonviolent drug law violators  not the kingpins mandatory sentences intended to apprehend.

Why should mandatory minimums be changed?

Judges no longer control sentencing. Mandatory minimums shift control over sentencing to prosecutors. Prosecutors determine the charge, which can require a mandatory sentence; whether the case is tried in state or federal court; and whether the defendant has provided enough useful information to be given reduced sentence for cooperation.

Judges no longer consider the fact of each case or the individuals role. The charge determines if the sentence is mandatory. If it is, only the weight and type of drug, or the presence of a firearm during a felony offense, determines its length. The judge cannot lower a mandatory sentence because of the circumstances of the case or a personas role, motivation, or likelihood of repeating the crime.

Conspiracy laws make those at the top and those at the bottom of the drug trade equally culpable. Low-level defendants, drug couriers, addicts or those on the periphery of the drug trade often have no information to give to prosecutors for a sentence reduction, unlike those who are most culpable and thus more likely to receive a reduced sentence for cooperation.

Mandatory minimums are rarely imposed on drug kingpins. For example, the majority of federal cocaine offenders generally perform lower level functions. Only six percent of cocaine and crack offenders are in the top two roles of the drug chain. (U.S. Sentencing Commission, Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy, 2002)


Who serves mandatory minimums?

Nonviolent drug defendants. Overwhelmingly, federal drug defendants,  85 percent of them, are nonviolent. Yet many receive mandatory minimums of five or 10 years or more, without regard for their role in the offense.

People of color. More people of color are serving time in federal prisons than their populations would indicate. African Americans account for 13 percent of the general population, yet in 2003 they comprised 27 percent of those receiving federal mandatory drug sentences. Hispanics constituted 12.5 percent of the general population, but received 43 percent of the drug mandatory sentence.

An increasing number of women. Women are the fastest-growing sector of the prison population. Nearly 66 percent of the federal female prisoners are serving drug sentences. Taking a message for a boyfriend involved in a drug deal or driving him to the bank can lead to conspiracy charges, and the woman can be held liable for the entire amount of drugs sold.

Family members. Three out of five federal prisoners have children; their mean sentence is 10 years. Two-thirds of fathers and three-quarters of mothers in federal prison were convicted of drug offenses.

(via Famm.org)