The criminal justice system is designed to create laws and procedures that bring order to society. It has a social contract with the community to create a safe climate make people feel secure while walking on the streets or dealing fairly with other people. However, though people may abide with the laws, the criminal justice is mandated to enforce them. The system itself is governed by policies designed to regulate its actions and guide its decisions. Lawmakers and judicial officers are continuously improving and recommending policy changes in their determination to make them more effective and operational to current society ( Siegel & Worrall, 2019). This paper seeks to identify and describe an existing criminal justice policy that was developed as an alternative solution to its predecessor. The essay will discuss factors that led to its development and the importance of developing an alternative.
The Fair Sentencing Statute of 2010
The Fair Sentencing Statute passed in 2010 by President Obama’s Administration sought to reduce the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine from 100:1 to 18:1. Though not scientifically proven, it was assumed that crack was more dangerous than powder cocaine though they are the same variants. Therefore, people arrested in possession of crack served lengthy sentences in comparison to the ones found possessing powder cocaine (American Civil Liberties Union, 2010).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
How the Policy was Developed as an Alternative Solution
The rise in crime levels in the 1970s and 80s compelled prosecutors, judges, parole, and other correctional officers to recommend harsh punishment to offenders. Consequently, this has led to the increase in the rates of incarcerations in the past four decades predominantly due to the higher likelihood of being imprisoned and the longer length of sentences. The latter become the primary cause of the high imprisonment rates since the 90s. The proliferation in the federal and state policies and laws that provided for the longer length of stays for drug and violent crimes as well as repeat offenders have contributed to the high rates of imprisonments. It implies that the rise in incarceration rates was a product of policy choices. These are the outcomes of laws and statutes passed by Congress and signed into law by governors and presidents ( Travis, Western & Redburn, 2014).
The most important statute was the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, signed into law by President Reagan. The administration intended to introduce stiffer penalties on drug offenders, and this witnessed the introduction of mandatory minimum sentences (the 100:1 ratio). Those found in possession of 5 grams of crack cocaine were subject to a minimum of 5 years imprisonment without parole while those in possession of 500 grams would serve the same period. After its enactment, the average time a drug-related convict would serve increased from 22 months to 33 months (Boyd, 1986).
Factors that Contributed to the Development of the Fair Sentencing Act
The former sentence led to massive racial outbursts since most of the convicts were African American. Under the 100:1 regime, persons could serve time due to non-violent drug offenses than other did for violent crimes. After its enactment, the US Sentencing Commission sought to review cases of over 12000 individuals with crack offenses, 85% of whom were African Americans for a possible reduction in offenses. The move was designed to reduce the over a decade long of racial disparity in the prison system that was brought about by the harsh statute of 1986 to revive confidence in the criminal justice system especially to the people of color (American Civil Liberties Union, 2010).
Importance of Developing an Alternative
Even after the enactment of the Fair Sentencing Act in 2010, little has changed. The law was enforced to solve the racial issues that have pounded the US for centuries; however, it was less rehabilitative for the drug-related criminal offenders. The current criminal justice system has continued to incline toward punishment than correction and rehabilitation. For that reason, reducing minimum sentences for offenders and the elimination of collateral damage after the release of a convict would assist in the reduction of drug crimes. The U.S government has over the years channeled a significant percentage of its funds towards enforcement and interdiction than prevention and treatment programs. A policy should be instigated that provides for 50-50 allocation of resources between enforcement and treatment than the current 68-34 formula ( American Bar Association, 2018).
Policy changes should also focus on the alternatives to incarcerations. The US is the only nation that relies heavily on imprisonment as the mode of sanctioning criminal activities than any other nation around the world. Currently, the Federal Bureau of Prisons indicates that US prisons have 78,194 individuals convicted due to drug crimes, which makes up 46.1% of the total number of convicts in prisons. Whereas the US makes up only 5% of the global population, it is responsible for approximately 25% of the prisoners worldwide. The cost of maintaining the prisons has risen to over $56 billion annually. Surprisingly, violent crimes only make up only 8% of the incarcerations. It signifies that the nation can lower costs and reduce incarcerations in federal prisons by diverting nonviolent offenders or those who pose minimal or no threat to the society and reserve the prisons for violent offenders. In this era of financial prudence, community-based sanctions are ideal unlike the court-imposed collateral liabilities that make it difficult for former felons to get a job or housing; hence, putting them back to drug dealings ( American Bar Association, 2018).
Conclusion
The study focused on the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 that replaced the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. The FSA reduced the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine offenses from 100:1 to 18:1 because 85% of the convicts were African Americans. The previous law portrayed racial disparities, and this created less confidence in the judicial system. However, the FSA did little to eliminate the punishment-oriented American criminal justice system. As an alternative, the nation could consider lowering the overall drug-related mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent offenders and employ community-based sanctions to rehabilitate people.
References
American Bar Association. (2018). Criminal Justice System Improvements . Retrieved from https://www.americanbar.org/advocacy/governmental_legislative_work/priorities_policy/criminal_justice_system_improvements/
American Civil Liberties Union (2010). The Fair Sentencing Act . Retrieved from https://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal-law-reform/drug-law-reform/fair-sentencing-act
Boyd, M.G. (1986, October 28).Reagan Signs Anti-Drug Measure: Hopes for Drug-Free Generation. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/1986/10/28/us/reagan-signs-anti-drug-measure-hopes-for-drug-gree-generation.html
Siegel, L. & Worrall, J. (2019). Essentials of criminal justice . Boston, MA: Cengage.
Travis, J., Western, B., & Redburn, F. S. (2014). The growth of incarceration in the United States: Exploring causes and consequences . Retrieved from https://johnjay.jjay.cuny.edu/nrc/NAS_report_on_incarceration.pdf
