But He Pled Guilty?

Too often, people assume that if someone pled guilty, they belong behind bars.  Often instead, a guilty plea is the result of wanton application of mandatory minimum laws:

Using their discretionary power to apply lengthy “enhancements” on top of required terms, critics say, federal prosecutors are strong-arming defendants into pleading guilty and overpunishing those who do not — undermining the fairness and credibility of the justice system.

“Prosecutors routinely threaten ultraharsh, enhanced mandatory sentences that no one — not even the prosecutors themselves — thinks are appropriate,” said Judge John Gleeson, of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, in a court statement Oct. 9. The way prosecutors use this hammer, Judge Gleeson wrote, “coerces guilty pleas and produces sentences so excessively severe they take your breath away.”

Fortunately, there seems to be some bipartisan support for scaling these cruel laws back.

One proposal, sponsored by Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, and Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, would give judges the power to waive mandatory minimums and enhancements. A second bill, sponsored by Senator Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, and Senator Mike Lee, Republican of Utah, would reduce the length of mandatory drug sentences.

Let’s hope these bills are something that even this dysfunctional Congress can agree on.

By: Stuart Shapiro

Stuart is a professor and the Director of the Public Policy
program at the Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers
University. He teaches economics and cost-benefit analysis and studies
regulation in the United States at both the federal and state levels.
Prior to coming to Rutgers, Stuart worked for five years at the Office
of Management and Budget in Washington under Presidents Clinton and
George W. Bush.