Category Archives: War On Drugs

MISGUIDED JUSTICE MEMO MOVES AMERICA BACKWARDS

From its inception thiswebsite has been an unwavering opponent of the federal governments failed War on Drugs.

First, its wrong.

Second, it doesnt work.

Third, its hamstringing our economy.

Government efforts to outlaw certain types of recreational drugs have drained taxpayers of more than $1.3 trillion since the administration of Richard Nixon instituted this New Prohibition in the early 1970s. Yet this massive infusion of resources hasfailed to curb either supply or demand.

Nonetheless, another $50-60 billion in public money will be spent this year despite the demonstrable failure of such appropriations to produce the results policymakers have promised.

Vast expenditures on criminalization and repressive measures directed at producers, traffickers and consumers of illegal drugs have clearly failed to effectively curtail supply or consumption, a 2011 report from the Global Commission on Drug Policy noted.

Meanwhile, the War on Drugs has created a new class of violent criminals on the one handwhilecriminalizing behavior that ought to be perfectly legal on the other. Its also snuffed out a potentially lucrative new marketplace at a time when our countrys economy could desperately use additionaljobs and income.

Its time frankly past time our nation adoptedsome common sense in its approach to this issue. In our view, U.S. drug policy should beguided by the following four core principles

1 FREEDOM Americans should have the right to consumewhatever recreational drugs they wish within the privacy of their own homes or businesses or the homes and businesses ofother consenting adults. As long as their enjoyment of this liberty doesnt impose upon the liberties of others (i.e. injurious negligence, child neglect, driving while impaired, etc.), then it should be none of the governments business what substances they consumebehind closed doors.

2. FREE MARKETS Americans should have the right to produce and sellwhatever recreational drugsthey wish within their own homes or under the auspices of a business enterprise. Again, as long as this engagement of the marketplace doesnt impose upon the liberties of others it should be none of the governments business.

3. SMALLGOVERNMENTIn the interest of public health and safety, government should have the right to regulate and tax the recreational drug industry in a fair, consistent and transparent manner using whatever proceeds it derives from the industry toward the funding of core government functions.

4. LOCAL CONTROL Local governments i.e. municipalities and counties should retain the right to limit or even outlaw the public consumption of recreational drugs within their communities. While we dont believe local leaders should be allowed to dictate what citizens grow or consume on private property, it should be up to local leaders to determine the extent to which recreational drug use is permitted in public in their communities.

Unfortunately, these common sense principles are not guiding the decisions of our policymakers. Just this week, U.S. attorney general Jeff Sessions appeared to take a major step in the opposite direction sending a memo to all U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecutorsinstructing them tocharge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense those that carry the most substantial guidelines sentence, including mandatory minimum sentences.

Here is Sessions memo

Fullscreen Mode

Sessions claimed this policy shift was not directed toward low-level drug users but rather violent drug traffickers.

Our argument to that? Why preserve a system that keeps violent drug traffickers in business in the first place?

Last month, the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. released a new report entitled Four Decades and Counting: The Continued Failure of the War on Drugs. Written by analysts Christopher J. Coyne and Abigail R. Hall, this report meticulously documents the extent to which Americas current approach has been disastrous on all fronts and how changes at the state level as well as critical shifts in U.S. federal policies, both domestically and internationally are needed.

Wait internationally?

Yup American taxpayers are subsidizing anti-drug efforts all over the world, efforts that are failing every bit as spectacularly as governments domestic jihad.

The U.S. War on Drugs, like the ill-fated war on alcohol of the early 20th century, is a prime example of disastrous policy, naked self-interest, and repeated ignorance on the part of elected officials and other policymakers, Coyne and Hall concluded. From its inception, the drug war has repeatedly led to waste, fraud, corruption, violence, and death. With many states moving toward legalization or decriminalization of some substances, and other nations moving to legalize drugs altogether, rethinking Americas drug policy is long overdue.

Indeed it is

Supporters of recreational drug use were hopeful that U.S. president Donald Trump would move our country away from the failed policies of the past and to Trumps credit his administration has embraced medical marijuanaas a legitimate treatment option for millions of Americans suffering from a variety of ailments.

Thats a good first step. The legalization of medical cannabis (as we have repeatedly stated) policy debate it is amoral imperative. We have consistently supported it, and we hope lawmakers in our home state of South Carolina will continueadvancing compassionate legislationaimed at legalizing it in the Palmetto State.

Unfortunately, Trumps White House spokesman Sean Spicer has spoken with stunning ignorance about the origins of Americans ongoing opioid epidemic while Sessions DOJ memo strikes us as yet another example of the extent to which some law and order conservatives continue to tragicallymisread this situation.

Cracking down on drug dealers isnt the answer. The answer is upending their apple cart by ending four decades of failed prohibition and providing for a regulated recreational drug marketplace.

Banner via iStock

Go here to see the original:

War On Drugs, Rebooted - FITSNews

Ordering federal prosecutors on Friday to crack down on drug offenders, Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions made clear he wants the Justice Department to turn the clock back to an earlier, tougher era in the four-decades-long war on drugs.

In a memo, Sessions said federal prosecutors should charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense in drug cases, even when that would trigger mandatory minimum sentencing.

Mandatory sentencing laws for drug users have been controversial for years, and many Republicans as well as Democrats now oppose them as unfair, ineffective and too costly.

The new Justice Department policy cancels the Obama administrations attempts to pull back on harsh sentencing strategies, which had produced a huge growth in prison populations. It restores some language from a 2003 memo written by then-Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft.

Speaking Friday at the Justice Department, Sessions said the crackdown was a key part of President Trumps promise to keep America safe, linking drug trafficking to increased homicide rates in some cities.

We are returning to the enforcement of the law as passed by Congress plain and simple, Sessions said.

Sessions rescinded policy memos signed in 2013 and 2014 by then-Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. that instructed prosecutors to reserve the toughest charges for high-level traffickers and violent criminals.

Since then, the number of drug offenders given mandatory minimum sentences has dropped dramatically, contributing to a 14% decline in the total federal prison population, with 188,797 inmates this month.

Holder slammed Sessions policy Friday, calling it ideologically motivated and not supported by facts.The policy announced today is not tough on crime, Holder said. It is dumb on crime.

The new policy threatens to halt a push for bipartisan criminal justice reform that has been led by some of Trumps closest advisors and embraced by key Republicans on Capitol Hill, including House Speaker Paul D. Ryan.

Sen. Rand Paul, (R-Ky.) criticized the new policy Friday, arguing that mandatory minimum sentences disproportionately targeted minorities because of how different drugs are categorized under the law.

The new policy will accentuate that injustice, Paul said in a statement.

Sessions is an outlier in his own party and even among many of his own colleagues in the administration, said Inimai Chettiar, a director at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law in New York. A lot of Republicans support reductions in sentencing.

Indiana, for example, implemented a comprehensive criminal justice reform package when Vice President Mike Pence was governor.

I would say that we need to adopt criminal justice reform nationally. We have got to do a better job recognizing and correcting the errors in the system that do reflect institutional bias in criminal justice, Pence said in a campaign debate last year.

As governor of Texas, Energy Secretary Rick Perry guided his state through a major shift in sentencing away from the kind of harsh penalties that Sessions seeks to restore in federal courts.

In those states and others, alarm at the escalating cost of incarceration helped drive calls for reform.

But Sessions, a former federal prosecutor in Alabama, was never on board with the push.As a U.S. senator from Alabama, he helped kill a proposed sentencing reform bill, warning the legislation could lead to more felons on the streets. He also helped block a 2016 bill that would have eased federal sentencing for marijuana use.

Since joining the Trump administration, Sessions has reversed an Obama administration attempt to phase out federal contracts with private prisons, saying the cells will be needed for the boost in inmate population he sees coming.

Under mandatory sentencing laws, judges have little discretion on how to sentence drug offenders. Prosecutors decisions on charging often determine how long offenders will spend in prison.

For example, if federal prosecutors include the amount of drugs in their written charges, that can trigger a mandatory minimum sentence.

They also can file motions for so-called sentence enhancements, which can effectively double drug sentences for repeat offenders, or put them in jail for life.

Some prosecutors use these tough tools as a hammer in plea negotiations, or to force offenders to cooperate.

In his memo, Sessions said prosecutors must disclose all facts relevant to a sentence, like drug amounts. He also canceled a Holder policy that said prosecutors should not use sentencing enhancement motions to coerce guilty pleas.

Drug trafficking is an inherently violent business, Sessions said. If you want to collect a drug debt, you cant file a lawsuit in court. You collect it by the barrel of a gun.

He said heroin is cheaper, purer and more easily available than ever. Advocates of sentencing reform say that the opioid crisis is evidence that tough policies of the past have failed.

But Sessions said that tougher enforcement could reverse that trend.

One former federal judge from Tennessee said he was forced to sentence a low-level drug dealer to life in prison. The defendant refused to take a plea deal for 20 years in prison and was convicted at trial.

Under no circumstances was this sentence justice, said the former judge, Kevin Sharp, who has become an advocate for sentencing reform. We ruined his life.

In drug cases, Sharp said, the judges role in sentencing is dramatically reduced. I have yet to talk to a judge who says mandatory minimums are a good idea, he said.

joseph.tanfani@latimes.com

Twitter: @jtanfani

ALSO

Read the original:

Sessions restores tough drug war policies that trigger ...

Bystanders look on at a crime scene where an alleged drug personality was shot dead by unidentified men in Pasig city, east of Manila, Philippines, 13 May 2017. (EPA photo)

FOCUS: The Philippine government's war on drugs, implemented starting nearly a year ago upon the assumption into power of President Rodrigo Duterte, has not only resulted in the deaths of thousands of defiant suspected drug personalities, but also left jails swelling with more inmates and more legal cases piling up, authorities recently said.

At a recent forum about the condition of Philippine jails and prisons, Paulino Moreno Jr. of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology said more than 142,000 individuals, as of last month, are detained across the country as almost all of them undergo trial for the various cases they are facing. Around 64% of these detainees are charged with violating the illegal drugs law.

The country's 466 jails have an ideal combined capacity of only around 20,400 individuals, and are only manned by no more than 12,000 personnel.

"Our statistics show that that's really the trend -- that most of the cases coming in are because of the law enforcement focus on illegal drugs (under the current) administration," Mr Moreno said as he acknowledged the "war on drugs" as "the major contributor to the congestion."

A previous population data report of Mr Moreno's agency covering until the end of January this year placed the number of detainees at nearly 132,000.

According to the government, more than 57,500 antidrug operations were conducted by authorities from July 1 last year up to May 9 this year, resulting in the arrests of 72,812 individuals and the deaths of 2,949 others who reportedly fought it out with law enforcers.

A separate report of the Philippine National Police noted that of the nearly 9,500 homicide incidents from July 1 last year up to March 31 this year, about one-fifth have been determined to be related to illegal drugs, while more than half are still under investigation. Around 20% of the cases, meanwhile, were found to be not related to illegal drugs.

Mr Duterte, who was sworn into office on June 30 last year, had vowed to be harsh against illegal drugs, criminality and corruption, believing that peace and order will spur economic development across the country. He cites his two-decade leadership in Davao City on Mindanao island that used such a model as his concrete example.

Mr Duterte repeatedly said his administration's war on drugs will not stop until the last drug pusher is removed from the streets and last drug lord is killed. He said law enforcers are mandated to neutralize suspects who fight back and endanger the lives of the former.

The campaign had facilitated also the surrender of nearly 1.27 million drug personalities, of whom, almost 90,000 are peddlers. Authorities estimate there are 4 million Filipinos who are hooked to illegal drugs as users and peddlers.

Percida Acosta, chief of the Public Attorney's Office which provides free legal service to indigent individuals facing charges, disclosed that before Mr Duterte came into power on June 30 last year, her office was handling some 82,000 drug-related cases. But six months later, it "got bloated" to around 303,000 cases.

These drug-related cases, Ms Acosta said, account for more than 50% of all the cases her office is handling. Private law firms, meanwhile, handle much fewer drug-related cases, although these involve bigger personalities like drug lords and traffickers, she said.

"Not all (accused in these drug-related cases) were brought to jail because there is no more place for them there. Some were asked to return to their homes, or were referred to religious groups, non-government organizations and their communities for self-rehabilitation," Ms Acosta said.

With only 1,655 public lawyers across the country who also handle other cases like murder and rape, Ms Acosta said measures are being taken to reduce the case load of her office, including an appeal to the court to allow "small-time" violators of the illegal drugs law to plea bargain for the early disposition of their cases. "These smalltime drug users are just victims of drug traffickers," Ms Acosta said.

Meanwhile, Martin Perfecto, deputy director for reformation at the Bureau of Corrections, said the problem of congestion has existed for a long time, disclosing that the current population of all seven prison facilities across the country stands at over 41,000. The ideal capacity is only for a little over 19,200.

Mr Perfecto said about 30% of the current population consists of convicted drug offenders.

It is not clear, however, if the current campaign against illegal drugs made the congestion problem in prisons worse, especially since the country's Dangerous Drugs Board noted that the conviction rate for illegal drugs cases is very low.

Mr Perfecto hopes the current administration will start implementing the modernization program of the Bureau of Corrections, which is covered by a law passed in 2013, to be able to address the issues of congestion and its personnel, among others.

Just like the Bureau of Corrections, Mr Moreno said the Bureau of Jail Management also needs more facilities to reduce its congestion rate and eventually comply with international standards.

Rodolfo Diamante of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines lamented that despite the existence of the problem of jail congestion for a long time and the constant advocacy of several sectors to address it, it has remained a low priority for various governments.

"The reform of the jail and prison system is not really given attention to. There is no comprehensive reform program. The problem about jail conditions is not about lack of funds. It's the lack of priority, and the lack of implementation of the law," said Mr Diamante.

Jacqueline Ann de Guia of the Commission on Human Rights said the Philippines has "one of the most complex penitentiary systems in the world, considering the number of institutions that take care of our penitentiary system -- the Philippine National Police, the BJMP, local government units, the Bureau of Corrections."

"That explains the differences in policies, approaches, budgetary allocations," Ms de Guia said.

Mr Diamante said a proposal to integrate all jails and prison systems under one government unit is supported by his organization, as well as "alternatives to imprisonment," which also include the granting of executive clemency to longtime and aging prisoners.

"This congestion problem is really big, and is not just of the BJMP and the agencies involved in custodial function. This is a societal problem, and it needs a whole-of-government approach, and including the private sector also, of course," Mr Moreno said.

In light of the worsening congestion in jails amid the current administration's war on drugs, Ms de Guia reiterated to the Commission on Human Rights the fact that the government should have foreseen "many will be arrested."

"So, we should first fix the conditions of our jails. Let's allot budget for the construction of new facilities, like what the BJMP has said, so we won't have problems with congestion. We hope there is also an approach towards rehabilitation," Ms de Guia said.

At a separate forum, Benjamin Reyes of the Dangerous Drugs Board stressed the campaign against illegal drugs is not limited only to law enforcement, but also includes prevention and rehabilitation.

See more here:

Philippines' war on drugs: detentions, legal cases surge - Bangkok Post

How can we stop Attorney General Jeff Sessions from instigating another round of the War on Drugs, which has unwaveringly focused on black and Latino neighborhoods, filling for-profit prisons and disrupting and disenfranchising the communities of people of color?

A Justice Department spokesman said Sessions intent is to keep Americans safe, but there is no evidence that the Obama administrations less aggressive approach toward prosecuting drug cases led to a rise in crime. Sessions record in the area of civil rights is dubious at best, which leads me to suspect that his department will display no more even-handedness than those of previous Republican administrations. Perhaps we can get our legislators to deny funding for this latest law-and-order blitz.

Patricia Bryan

Eugene

More Letters in the editor's mailbag articles

Mail letters to: Mailbag, 3500 Chad Drive, Eugene, OR 97408-7348

E-mail: rgletters@registerguard.com

Read the rest here:

Don't start another War on Drugs - The Register-Guard

Punishing low-level drug offenders is back in style. Thanks a lot, Jeff Sessions.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions. (AP Photo / Frank Franklin II)

On Friday, Attorney General Jeff Sessions pulled the plug on policy changes implemented by the Department of Justice under President Obama that had begun to change Americasdecades-long practice of keepinglow-level criminals, like nonviolent drug offenders, languishing in prison. Sessions has directed prosecutorsto return to strict sentencing and mandatory minimums, which could increase prison populations, andin the midst of a national opioid epidemicrevive the unproven belief that punitive measures, instead of treatment, will solve drug addiction. And todays memowill again have the criminal-justice system targeting poor black and Latino communities already devastated by the war on drugs.1

In his memo rolling back the Justice Departmentsefforts to shrink the number of people in prison, Sessions wrote, It is a core principle that prosecutors should charge and pursue the most serious readily provable offense. That means tellingprosecutors and judges everywhere to return to extreme measures like seeking 10 years minimum for street-level drug sales. The policy, he wrote is moral, and just, and produces consistency. But thats exactly the problem: It is not moral or just, or effective. Mandatory minimums, charging as much as you can, those tough sentences dont work, said Michael Collins, deputy director at the Drug Policy Alliance, an organization dedicated to promoting science-based drug policy. They just exacerbate the problem, and it doesnt stop drug use.2

Research from the last 20 years shows that imposing mandatory minimums, particularly on nonviolent drug offenders, hasnt had positive results: according to a report from the Vera Institute of Justice, incarceration has not been effective when it comes to reducing crime, and longer sentences havent reduced recidivism. [Sessions] has no evidence to show that being harsher is effective or necessary or what prosecutors or judges want, said Roy Austin, who served as deputy assistant to the president for the Office of Urban Affairs, Justice, and Opportunity at the White Houseunder Obama. Our prisons dont rehabilitate, or they do a very bad job at rehabilitating. Why are you locking someone up for 10 years with substandard programming thinking theyre going to be a better person?3

After Eric Holder issued the memo revising sentencing guidelines and curbing the use of mandatory minimums in 2013, the federal prison population decreased,butfederal prisons account for a only small fraction of the total prison population. States, meanwhile, have also been moving away from mandatory minimums; since2000, at least 29 states have done so,though there has not been enough research to determine what impact suchchanges have been on incarceration numbers nationwide.4

Austin says that changes resulting from Holders 2013 memo produced no negative impact. So why go back?5

In March, Jeff Sessions said in a speech to law-enforcement officials, Our nation needs to say clearly once again that using drugs is bad. He added, It will destroy your life. He, like many otherpoliticians and public officials, believe that draconian drug policies will reduce crime and rehabilitate drug users. In reality, such policies have exploded prison populations, and they have targeted black and Latino communities.The Drug Policy Alliance found that nonviolent drug law offenders made up 50,000 of the prison population in 1980 to over 400,000 by 1997. Today there are more than 430,000 people sitting in state and federal prisons for all drug offenses.6

Harsh sentencing for drug offenses started with President Richard Nixon. Nixon objected to drugs on moral grounds, calling drug abuse public enemy No. 1 anddeclaring a war on drugs in 1971. It was a move that carried with it the convenient idea that drug users were criminal and that drug use was to blame for rampant urban crime. This idea appealed to the silent majority,white voters who latched onto the idea that drug addiction should be dealt with as a crime, rather than a public-health issue. A massive increase in public spending on incarceration and law enforcement followed.7

In 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which devoted $1.7 billion to the war on drugs and created mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses. Individuals convicted for crack possession weregiven longer sentences than those who were convicted for cocaine use, a policythat disproportionately impacted poorer communities of color. In his bookHigh Price, Columbia University professor Carl Hart argues that crack use followed, rather than precipitated, unemployment in the black community. High unemployment rates were indeed correlated with increases in crack cocaine use, he wrote, but whats not well known is that they preceded cocaine use, rather than followed it. In other words, crack wasnt the reason black people in America were losing their jobs, their jobs were already disappearing. Hart later wrote, Unfortunately, many peopleboth blacks and whitesfell for the idea that crack cocaine was the key cause of our problems and that more prisons and longer sentences would help solve them. In fact, Hart writes, while crack has been seen as a largely black problem, whites are actually more likely to use the drug, according to national statistics. 8

THE STAKES ARE HIGHER NOW THAN EVER. GET THE NATION IN YOUR INBOX.

So, the war on drugs gave us a larger prison prison population, made a moral argument for locking up low-level drug offenders, and specifically targeted black and brown people. And instead of continuing on with the approach that Obamas Justice Department put forth, one that sought to reduce prison populations and move away from racial targeting, Sessions is bringing it back.9

There is also an economic argument to be made against Sessionss recommendations. Returning to mandatory minimums, Austin says, means pouring more money into the Bureau of Prisons, a subdivision of the Department of Justice, to deal with overcrowded prisons. It means more private prisons. And, as more public funds are spent on incarceration, cuts to programs aimed at reducing recidivism are likely to follow.Says Jeff Robinson, director of the Trone Center for Justice Equality at the ACLU, Its the most transparently illogical and unintelligent approach to criminal justice.10

Editors Note: This piece initiallyreferred incorrectly to Roy Austins position. He was the deputy assistant to the president for the Office of Urban Affairs, Justice, and Opportunity at the White House, not at the Justice Department.

Originally posted here:

Welcome to the 'War On Drugs,' Redux - The Nation.

James Forman Jr. wanted to tell a story that put African-Americans at the center, and not just on the sidelines. He found that story in a Washington, D.C. courtroom where all the actors the judge, his client, and the prosecutor all looked like him.

It was the 1990s, and Forman was a public defender trying to keep a young man named Brandon, whod been caught with a gun and a small amount of marijuana, out of the then notoriously inhumane (and now defunct) Oak Hill Youth Correctional Facility.

Forman, who is now a Yale Law School professor and author of the celebrated new book Locking Up Our Own: Crime and Punishment in Black America, told WNHH radio host Kica Matos during the latest episode of Kicas Corner that he saw his work in the public defenders office as the civil rights challenge of my generation.

That makes sense if you know the environment in which Forman was raised. He is a movement baby whose parents met through their work for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, or SNCC, as it was most commonly known. His father, James Forman Sr., served as SNCCs executive secretary.

By the late 1990s, the U.S. had surpassed Russia as the worlds largest jailer. Forman saw the disparities of who that impacted the most in courtrooms just like the one he was in that day with Brandon. He saw keeping Brandon, a poor kid growing up in a tough D.C. neighborhood, out of jail, particularly one that had no functioning school and no viable social services, as civil rights work.

The judge, whod lived through Jim Crow and segregation, saw things differently. He told Brandon that day that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. had died for his freedom, not so that Brandon could be carrying an illegal gun. Actions have consequences, the judge said, and he sent Brandon off to Oak Hill.

The judge had used the same civil rights history that I had used for becoming a public defender, but he had flipped it, Forman said. He was using it as a form of argument for why [Brandon] had to be locked up. The judge wasnt alone.

Formans new book is about how a generation of people who had fought for freedom during the civil rights movement and become the first generation of black elected officials in largely black cities like Washington, D.C. found themselves contributing to the mass incarceration of their own people. He said he wanted to tell the story of how that happened, and hopefully offer some ideas on how to keep it from happening again.

When people think of a drugs impact on the black community, Forman said, they often think about the crack epidemic of the 1980s and early 1990s. But in the late 1960s, it was heroin that was having devastating impacts on cities with high concentrations of black people. Crime was through the roof. The murder rate had tripled in the District of Columbia and doubled in other places. Black constituents wanted their black elected officials to do something.

As part of his research for the book, Forman spent summers reading the constituent letters in the archived records of former D.C. City Council members and he said, what leaps off the pages is the pain and anguish that people were feeling. They wrote comments like, I feel like a prisoner in my own home, Forman said. I feel like a stranger on my own street.

I cant walk to the store. I cant take my kid to school without passing drug dealers. Theyre shooting up the place. What happened to us as a community? What happened to us as a people?

This first generation of black elected officials who had come into power after the fall of formal Jim Crow wanted to be responsive to black death and victimization in a way that government had not been for centuries prior to this moment in history.

Prior to this time, Forman said, black folks didnt call the police if they were robbed or assaulted in their own neighborhood because they knew from experience that the then mostly white police forces wouldnt respond, and if they did respond, they would make the situation much worse.

It wasnt a murder if it was a dead black person, he said of the police then, which was overwhelmingly white even in a predominately black city like Washington, D.C. It was just another dead black person.

He said the black officials who had come to power wanted to prove that they would do things differently. They wanted to protect black lives, he said.

They also wanted to address the root causes of crime and addiction with better jobs, housing, schools, and drug and mental health treatment, Forman said. What they got was law enforcement.

They wanted a Marshall Plan for urban America, he said. They wanted a massive investment in an infusion of jobs in our community for a lot of reasons, including fighting crime. Although this is a story of black characters front and central, any story thats about what people of color do in this country also has to be about the constraints and the racism and the things that surround them and limit their abilities. They wanted an all of the above strategy to fighting crime. But they only got one of the above.

Forman said thats because African-Americans have never controlled the U.S. Congress or statehouses.

We controlled cities, he said. So we could deploy more police. We could deploy more prosecutors. But we by ourselves did not have enough political power to create a Marshall Plan for urban America. People of color have always needed allies. Theyve always needed the white community to feel their pain, and that was never forthcoming.

Though the book examines what role African-Americans played in mass incarceration, including the dynamics of class and colorism, and the series of policy steps and possible missteps that contributed to the system, Forman said one cant view these factors as separate from racism.

Race is central, he said. White supremacy is central. You cant understand the history of this country, the history of the criminal justice system, the history of mass incarceration without understanding the role of racism. At the same time, its not the whole story.

Click on or download the above audio file to hear the full interview with James Forman Jr. on WNHH radios Kicas Corner.

View post:

Prof Mines The Roots Of The War On Drugs - New Haven Independent

Atty. Gen. Jeff Sessions is promising to renew the federal governments war on drugs, saying tough new sentencing policies are necessary to combat what he described as a surge of violent crime in cities.

The Justice Department on Friday released a memo from Sessions ordering federal prosecutors to pursue the highest charges possible, including those that carry mandatory minimum sentences, for drug offenders.

If you are a drug trafficker, we will not look the other way," Sessions said Friday at the Justice Department."We will not be willfully blind to your conduct.

Sessions is ending Obama administration policies that told federal prosecutors to avoid charging low-level offenders with crimes that carry heavy mandatory sentences.

The new Justice Department policy was met with fierce criticism from sentencing advocates, some former federal prosecutors and even some Republicans in Congress who have been pursuing sentencing-reform measures.

To be tough on crime we have to be smart on crime, tweeted Sen. Mike Lee(R-Utah).That is why criminal justice reform is a conservative issue.

Violent crime has increased over the last two years in many of the nation's cities, though it is still far below rates in the 1990s. Overall, according to the FBI, the nation's crime rate fell 50% between 1993 and 2015.

Sessions said the crackdown was a key part of President Trumps promise to keep America safe, linking drug trafficking to increased homiciderates in some cities.

Drug trafficking is an inherently violent business, he said. If you want to collect a drug debt, you cant file a lawsuit in court.You collect it by the barrel of a gun.

He said heroin is cheaper, more pure and more easily available than ever. Advocates of justice reform say that the nation's opioid crisis is evidence that tough policies of the past have failed.

But Sessions said that tougher enforcement could reverse that trend.

So we are returning to the enforcement of the law as passed by Congress plain and simple, he said.

View post:

With tough sentencing policy, Atty. Gen. Sessions pledges ... - Los Angeles Times

MANILA, Philippines - China has called on the international community to respect the Philippines sovereign prerogative in combating the drug menace in the country.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang issued the statement after 45 of 47 members of theUnited Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) urged the Philippine government to end extrajudicial killings and withdraw its plan to revive the death penalty.

Drugs are the common enemy for all human beings, bringing pain to many developing countries, including China. China supports President Duterte and the Philippine government in combating drug-related crimes in accordance with the law, Geng said in a press conference on Thursday night.

We hope the international community can respect the judicial sovereignty of the Philippines and support its efforts in fighting drug-related crimes through cooperation, he added.

Geng also called on UNHRC member-states to be objective in reviewing human rights situations in other countries.

On May 8, the 27th session of Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the UNHRC assessed the human rights situation in the Philippines.

Headlines ( Article MRec ), pagematch: 1, sectionmatch: 1

Several countries including China, Cuba, Russia and Venezuela made positive comments and lauded the efforts and achievements made by the Philippines in eliminating poverty, promoting socio-economic development as well as improving and protecting human rights.

Geng said the UPR was an important mechanism for UN member-states to conduct dialogue and cooperation on an equal footing in the area of human rights.

We hope various parties can be objective and fair in viewing the human rights conditions in different countries and promote the human rights cause through dialogue and cooperation, he said.

The Philippines received a total of 257 recommendations the highest from among the participating states. Recommendations after review averaged 220.

Extrajudicial killings, death penalty and human trafficking were the core issues on which the recommendations were based.

Around 8,000 suspected drug offenders have died since the Duterte administration launched a brutal campaign against illegal drugs last year.

Human rights advocates claimed that the drug war has encouraged summary executions and human rights violations, but officials have denied the allegation.

Meanwhile, the Chinese government is looking forward to working closely with incoming secretary of the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano to further strengthen relations betwee the two nations.

We welcome the appointment and congratulate Mr. Cayetano. China is ready to work with him to implement the high-level consensus and keep deepening practical cooperation to push forward China-Philippines relations for greater benefits to our peoples and regional peace and stability, Geng said.

Prior to his appointment as DFA secretary, Cayetano headed the Senate foreign relations committee. He was President Dutertes runningmate in last years election.

Last week, Cayetano led the Philippine delegation to the UNHRCs UPR of the Philippines in Geneva, Switzerland where he defended the Duterte administrations war on drugs.

Geng said that since last year, relations between the Philippines and China have achieved all-round improvementand bilateral cooperation has entered a new stage.

Cooperation across the board has recovered and yielded fruitful outcomes. Our relationship is making overall progress, he said.

Duterte is among 29 heads of state and government leaders who will attend the Belt and Road Forum on International Cooperation in Beijing from May 14 to 15.

During his first visit to Beijing in October last year, Duterte brought home $24 billion worth of investment pledges and infrastructure projects.

Read the original here:

China urges UN to support Philippines' war on drugs - Philippine Star

On Friday (May 12), a tectonic shift occurred on Capitol Hill when attorney general Jeff Sessions overturned an Obama-era policy and incited prosecutors all over the country to give low-level drug offenders the harshest penalties, leaving open a chance to extend mandatory prison sentences. While Sessions denied that his memo would affect low-level crimes, he assured that his agenda would lay a heavier hand on crime than former President Obama and former attorney general Eric Holder. Drug trafficking is an inherently dangerous and violent business, Sessions said. If you want to collect a drug debt, you cant file a lawsuit in court. You collect it with the barrel of a gun.

READ Condoleezza Rice On Donald Trump: Look, We Have A Different Kind Of President

The pressure to extend the exhausting and problematic war on drugs has often gone unnoticed in Trumps administration, given the constant rainfall of other scandals but just weeks earlier, comedic duo Keith and Kenny Lucas shared their thoughts on the matter in the form of their first Netflix stand-up special, Lucas Brothers: On Drugs. Known for their animated series Lucas Bros. Moving Company and cameos in 21 Jump Street and Lady Dynamite, the duo decided to take their first stand-up special in a political, but light note.

READ Count On Me: 7 Times Big Black Taught Us About Friendship

The funny men blend their deadpan stoner comedy with their hatred for Richard Nixon, the purveyor of the war on drugs (or what they call the war on ni**as who want to have fun). One of [Nixons] aides, Rob Halderman, even stated that they started the war on drugs to minimise the impact of black folks on the far left, Keith said. So there was intent with the policies with Ronald Reagan later doubling down on it. But the brothers believe there could be one man to bring the earth back to a comforting axisDwayne The Rock Johnson.

I think The Rock is the dream that Martin Luther King Jr. talked about, Kenny explained. Hes a combination of Obama, the celebrity of Trump but the ability to speak like Obama. The idea of the actor as a post-Trump candidate seems more believable these days since just this week, the Baywatch star toyed around with the idea in his interview with GQ.

The potential black futurists shelve out plenty of truths in the special and our chat, from the joy in OJ Simpson jokes to their dislike for the Trump administration.

***

VIBE: What inspired the focus for On Drugs?

Kenny: We have been developing our routine for about almost eight years and when we were scanning the material, we noticed there were characteristics between the jokes that connected to a larger topic so from there we thought, we should have it more systematic.

Keith: We decided to focus it more on the war on drugs since its impacted us in so many ways. First, our dad went to prison and second, its tough to get drugs when theres a war being waged against drug dealers. Technically, our material fits into the theme.

I appreciated the balance of social construct and comedy.

Kenny: Its hard to get the message out if youre being overtly political. If youre able to disguise it in a way where youre getting your opinion out there where its mostly jokes, but people can laugh at the jokes first and get the message later, I think its more effective.

Who do you hate more: Reagan or Nixon?

Kenny: I have a personal gripe for Reagan, I really hate Reagan, but you gotta go to the first mover, the first person who started it. You have to access their psychology and their intent behind the policy and all evidence seems to suggest that Nixon was racist. He was just a racist guy who didnt like black people so if hes this racist guy and has such a big impact on policies toward black and brown people I mean, Im not saying that racism caused it, but

Keith: One of his aides, Rob Halderman, even stated that they started the war on drugs to minimise the impact of black folks on the far left. So there was intent with the policies with Regan later doubling down on it. Also, Clinton doubled down so its hard to say I hate Regan and then leave Clinton out of it since he played a huge role in locking ni**as up.

But he played the sax so ni**as didnt care.

Keith: I didnt know if you read this, but theres a book that says if a president played the sax you can arrest a hundred thousand black people and everyone would be okay with it.

Word, it would be no problem at all. The Trump administration seems to find themselves crumbling from the inside. Do you think theres going to be any real change in the presidents leadership?

Kenny: Thats not going to happen.

Keith: When you have a gangsta, its gonna end one way. Every second were speaking, a law is being broken by this administration. Its sort of an infectious impact on the rest of his minions so theyre doubling down on the rhetoric. They havent seemed to think of pivoting to get these policies in place. Sessions is a warrior so hes not going to change. These guys are 65 plus, theyve established their opinions and the way they see the world.

Kenny: These old dudes, theyre not concerned about the younger generation at all. Theyre going to wage these wars and just assume that the young people are going to fight it. I think young people need to say, F**k that, f**k you guys, we didnt vote for you and were not going to fight in any baseless wars and if you guys try to put us in any baseless wars, were gonna revolt.

Keith: How is it that they allow 65 years olds to determine who goes to war when they dont even have to fight?

They cant even fight.

Keith: They cant even drive! F**k them.

Kenny: Yea its just a bunch of old white dudes f**king up the world.

The situation is very wild but if you had to choose another entertainer to rule the free world, who would it be?

Keith: For the free world? Theres only one man who can do this.

Kenny: Hes the most electrifying man in entertainment and thats The Rock. I think The Rock is the dream that Martin Luther King Jr. talked about, hes a combination of Obama, the celebrity of Trump but the ability to speak like Obama.

Keith: And hes just a bada** dude. Hes already got catchphrases. Hes the peoples champ so you can use that on the campaign easily.

Kenny: Smell what the Rock is cooking.

Keith: You can use that.

Kenny: When hes in a debate with someone he can just say, It doesnt matter what this guy says.

Keith: He has the perfect resume. Id vote for him if he was a Republican or a Democrat.

Kenny: I dont care what he is. Hes a perfect combination of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Obama and Trump.

Keith: And hell be the second black president.

Kenny: He should run in 2020.

Keith: He should! F**k it.

If that was to happen, it would be pretty awesome. I saw in the stand up that you guys had a plethora of OJ jokes. Whats the best thing about coming up with them?

Kenny: Buried in our subconscious, for black men at least, is Damn, OJ got away. He committed the worst crime against a white person and got away with it. So subconsciously, were like, Lets have a little fun with this and relive the moment.

Keith: Im obsessed with the case and with OJ as a character, I mean obviously its a tragedy, but when its had such an influential role on how we see TV and the legal system and how we see race in America. You cant help but formulate ideas around it, especially as comedians sometimes those beliefs turn into jokes. Its just one of those things you have to say about it because why not? Everyone else has.

Yeah, thats very true. I like the one about the stabbing.

Kenny: Im sure white people didnt find it funny.

Theyll be alright. Why do you guys love (or hate) Kazaam so much?

Kenny: Its definitely a love/hate thing.

I used to watch Lucas Bros. Moving Company and I remember it being referenced on there and so I wondered if you guys really liked it or not.

Keith: Its just one of those things that stand out in my childhood. So anything that was relevant when I was a child, but its subjectively a horrible movie. But Shaq as a genie so you cant look away. Why is he in a genie uniform? He cant rap, he cant act, hes a huge genie.

Kenny: It was Touchstone Pictures and Interscope. None of these companies are around anymore.

Its funny since theres an online theory that in another universe, Sinbad starred in Kazaam. Do you guys believe in the idea of the multiverse?

Kenny: [Not the Sinbad theory] but with the multiverse, Its the only thing that makes mathematical sense. We can only see 4.9 percent of the observable universe. So that means theres a vast universe we cant see and even with us trying to explain the 4.9 percent that we can observe makes me think that what we cant see is even more inexplicable.

What would be going on in that universe right now?

Kenny: Heres my theory and it could be farfetched cause Im still hungover from yesterday (April 21), but theres a universe for every possible outcome for every action you take. Every permutation that your life can take, theres a universe that exists for that. And thats true for seven billion people so you have to calculate the permeate and the other living things.

Keith: Everything is and isnt.

Kenny: How did we get to the cosmos?

Were spinning! Ill bring it back. Do you guys plan on making a return to the animated world? I really enjoyed the end of the special.

Keith: We want to. Were currently developing a TV show with TBS. It takes place in an alternate universe (laughs). Its a magical alternate universe where we get stuck and we have to goto a magic college and we sort of have to go through certain events to get back to our universe.

Kenny: And this is a historically black magic universe.

Keith: So its like an HBCU, but more a hybrid of magic university so were getting taught black magic and how to defend wizards against the universe. Its gonna be super trippy.

Anything else you guys wanna add?

Keith: They should check out the special if youre fans of our comedy or if youre not fans and hate us and want to leave a negative review, then still watch it.

Stream the Lucas Brothers: On Drugs over at Netflix.

READ Title Aside, Dear White People Is About Much More Than Race

View post:

Interview: The Lucas Brothers Talk The War On Drugs & Why The Rock Would Be The Perfect President - Vibe

Thousands of lives have been taken summarily, and we are debating whether those killings were justified or not

Senator Alan Cayetano traveled last week to Geneva, in Switzerland, to appear at a United Nations inquiry and argue on behalf of the Duterte government that, if any summary executions were happening in its war on drugs, these were not "state-sponsored".

He made other points, but still they were mainly about extrajudicial killings or EJKs, as they have come to be commonly called. He took issue particularly with media and other unofficial accounts of them and pronounced them falsehoods, as if these things don't qualify as truth until they have been Duterte-sanctified.

An immediate concern for Cayetanos representation was a complaint against Duterte with the International Criminal Court (ICC), based also in Geneva. The complaint was filed by Jude Sabio, lawyer for Edgar Matobato, who came forward last year and, in a foreshadowing of the present-day EJKs, confessed at a Senate hearing that he had been an assassin on a death squad in Davao City when Duterte was its mayor.

With reports of multiple drug-war deaths almost daily in the first 7 or 8 months of Duterte's 6-year presidential term reports backed by eyewitness accounts, pictures, and television footage taken by the networks as well as public closed-circuit systems how did Cayetano expect to make anyone disbelieve them and believe his word instead? One apparent trick was to seize on the phrase "state-sponsored", as EJKs are widely alleged, and split hairs around it.

To be sure, the phrase lends itself to semantic twisting, a game that lawyers like Cayetano like to play. But Etta Rosales, the former chairperson of the Commission on Human Rights, would not let any of that sort of thing pass. "Hogwash!" she declared and, with simple, cutting logic, asked rhetorically what government will dare admit "sponsoring" such brutality.

But lets indulge Cayetano, for the moment anyway. I'm not sure how the two words that form the disputed phrase state-sponsored are defined exactly in Cayetano's legal profession. But I cant imagine the word "sponsor" taking any meaning that departs essentially from the ones in lay usage: back, support, promote, sanction, approve of.

Gravest moral issue

Doesn't President Duterte do any and all that when he warns drug dealers and addicts, "I will kill you"? Doesn't he betray an even more perverse streak when he says he will be "happy to slaughter" all 3 million of them? Doesn't he encourage excesses by promising presidential protection to the extent of pardon to policemen prosecuting his drug war?

Concededly, the word "state", used synonymously with "president", can provoke legitimate contention: When does a presidential act become an act of the state? Maybe we could all agree to settle for a phrase that replaces state with president and takes sponsored for its partner or any of its synonyms. Thus, the President, who, after all, likes to invite challenges, is tested for his tough talk. Let him assume all responsibility for all the deaths in his war and all the abuses of his war enforcers, so that the state whatever that is may be spared.

But what are we doing, really, if not simply quibbling and quibbling over the gravest moral issue of our time. Thousands of lives have been taken summarily, and we are debating whether those killings were justified or not.

I'm reminded of a line from a movie, a comedy as it happens and, as such, appropriately desperate, I think, for drawing attention to the sick tragedy of our lives:

"I am drowning here, and you are describing the water!"

The resonance in fact does not end there. The ultimate evocation of our tragicomic situation comes from the title of the movie: As good as it gets. Rappler.com

Go here to read the rest:

[Newspoint] Quibbling over life and death in the war on drugs - Rappler