AG Holder to Unveil Changes in Criminal Justice System......

[CanadaJohn]

They are shifting gears to the "Obama really was a black President, honest. Look at all he did for black people" mode I suspect since his legislative agenda is pretty dead in the water right now. I really don't care why they are doing it, just so long as it is done. An injustice is an injustice regardless of how it came to be that way or stopped being that way as far as I am concerned.

I found this issue interesting since here in Canada we also have some "mandatory minimum" sentencing, however, our judiciary takes the position in some cases that they are the sentencing body of government and they will not allow the legislature to dictate to them how they apply "justice". Judges can only be dictated to if they allow it to happen or a higher court allows it to happen.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Re: Holder seeks limits on mandatory minimum sentencing

Understood.

The Power of pardon and commutations might be exercised by a sincere President. Carter did something similar on a mass scale.

POTUS & AG are in fact very powerful men under the law.

Well they do have some options, like:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/12/us/justice-dept-seeks-to-curtail-stiff-drug-sentences.html

In a major shift in criminal justice policy, the Obama administration moved on Monday to ease overcrowding in federal prisons by ordering prosecutors to omit listing quantities of illegal substances in indictments for low-level drug cases, sidestepping federal laws that impose strict mandatory minimum sentences for drug-related offenses.

But unless the LAWS change, the next Administration can simply go back to the old methodology.

 

[Sykes]

Re: Holder seeks limits on mandatory minimum sentencing

My bad. I was supposed to be quoting the OP. Somehow I quoted your post instead, and then failed to check it when I posted mine. Sorry, I was in a rush to go out to meet some freinds. :blushing2

Wait, what!? You have friends? And you're on the internet. Hmm. I thought everybody on the net was alone and lonely, and living in their mom's basement.

At least that's what I heard.

 

[Fisher]

I found this issue interesting since here in Canada we also have some "mandatory minimum" sentencing, however, our judiciary takes the position in some cases that they are the sentencing body of government and they will not allow the legislature to dictate to them how they apply "justice". Judges can only be dictated to if they allow it to happen or a higher court allows it to happen.

How are your judges chosen? Now in the state Court, our local judges will sometimes impose the MM then suspend all or some of it when they want to, but when they do not want to, they say their hands are tied. Obviously nobody who should have gone to prison but got off easy will appeal on that particular issue at least so it is still an open question. Often times it is relevant as to time discounts. Say if you get 5 years but the MM was 2 then you have to serve at least 2 full years before you can be eligible for the good behavior behind bars discounts on the remaining three, so it could make a difference of a few months.

 

[Helix]

Moderator's Warning:

threads merged.

 

[Sig]

Re: Holder seeks limits on mandatory minimum sentencing

[h=1]Holder seeks limits on mandatory minimum sentencing[/h]


Personally, I think he's right on the mark with this one. So do people from both ends of the right vs. left political spectrum.

Mandatory minimums have proven to be a truly bad idea. They have made a convoluted mess out of sentencing guidelines, case law, and jurisprudence. Most state courts who have them on the books for offenses such as drug dealing have found it necessary to pretend they do not exist, for it is impossible to impose a sentence of incarceration when there is no more room in the jails and prisons.

 

[Captain Adverse]

I found this issue interesting since here in Canada we also have some "mandatory minimum" sentencing, however, our judiciary takes the position in some cases that they are the sentencing body of government and they will not allow the legislature to dictate to them how they apply "justice". Judges can only be dictated to if they allow it to happen or a higher court allows it to happen.

Some State judges tried that too...Unfortunately, since most of them are elected, they soon learned they could lose their job if they kept it up.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Some State judges tried that too...Unfortunately, since most of them are elected, they soon learned they could lose their job if they kept it up.

Nothing wrong with being a principled "politician" even if you're a politician on the bench.

 

[Carjosse]

Re: Holder seeks limits on mandatory minimum sentencing

Until the root cause of the huge injustices of our system--the drug prohibition--is corrected, this won't do much at all.

We will see how serious Holder and Obama are about this. I'm pretty sure that as AG, and the Prez through EO, alot can be done quickly by DOJ. Pardon my cynicism, but I do not see either of those men as being sincere.

Well get rid of very state having different laws then you don't have the legal limbo Washington and Colorado have. The drug prohibition can be ended in one move not 50 different ones.

 

[radcen]

I consider Holder to be a domestic enemy of the US Constitution, and a dirtbag.

It would be interesting to know the motivation for this. I doubt very much it is his conscience bothering him, for he has no conscience.

It must be some perceived political advantage.

On the surface I welcome this direction. Having said that, I remain cautious. Will it be real, or will it be cosmetic window dressing with the devil in the details?

I also do have kind of a "Why this, why now?" thought about it, but regardless of that I hope it works out for the better and as publicly presented.

 

[radcen]

Re: Holder seeks limits on mandatory minimum sentencing

If this happens, will it have the force of law, or will it merely be a suggestion to prosecutors?

 

[Mason66]

On the surface I welcome this direction. Having said that, I remain cautious. Will it be real, or will it be cosmetic window dressing with the devil in the details?

I also do have kind of a "Why this, why now?" thought about it, but regardless of that I hope it works out for the better and as publicly presented.

Especially since legally Holder can't do what he says he is going to do.

Isn't he the top law enforcement officer in the country? Now he says he is going to enforce some laws and not others.

Does he not know he can't legally do this?

 

[radcen]

Especially since legally Holder can't do what he says he is going to do.

Isn't he the top law enforcement officer in the country? Now he says he is going to enforce some laws and not others.

Does he not know he can't legally do this?

In that sense, he hasn't seemed too concerned with upholding the law so far, so... :mrgreen: