In 1986, Congress adopted a 100:1 ratio for prosecuting crack cocaine and powder cocaine offenses. If I was caught dealing 10 grams crack to James, I would receive the same penalty that I would if I was caught dealing him a kilo of powder cocaine. The US Sentencing Committee has long tried to persuade Congress to change this policy but Congress has always rejected the idea. The Supreme Court has also been reluctant to rule on the issue until now.

The Supreme Court accepted review in the straightforward case Kimbrough v. US. The district judge handed down a sentence that was below the standard sentencing guidelines because he felt the guidelines were excessively long. The circuit court rejected the district judge’s ruling and remanded the case for resentencing.

This case seems like a textbook political issue. The Court is more likely to rule on the constitutionality of a judge issuing a below-guidelines sentence than the constitutionality of the crack/powder ratio. I think a lot of the reason the court took on this case has to do with the Claiborne case that they had to end prematurely. Both of the cases have similar underlying issues and this could simply be a substitute.



Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Random Posts

  • Change is Fun But...: I'm sad to see Justice Stevens leave the Court for a variety of reasons that have been well documented by people smarter than me. I'm also e...
  • New OT08 Term Stats : With 43 opinions released, the Court has now released just over half of the opinions it will release for the term. Lets take a look at some ...
  • Justice Thomas' History at Oral Argument: The big news in the world of the Supreme Court today is that Justice Thomas finally spoke at oral argument. It is not clear exactly what he ...
  • A Deeper Look at Reversal Rates: An article in today's Cincinati Enquirer highlights the Sixth Circuit's current 15-case losing streak in the Supreme Court. Circuits regular...
  • Who is Roy W. McLeese?: This morning, as I was perusing next month's hearing list, I noticed a name I wasn't familiar with: Roy W. McLeese. It isn't unusual to see ...