Criminal Justice

Monday Map: The Last Day for Rockefeller Laws

Published March 30, 2009 @ 04:20PM PT

This morning Russell Simmons wrote in this space about the coalition it took to bring down New York's destructive and failed Rockefeller drug laws. Tomorrow, the 3-year-old drug laws are likely to fall (or at least improve) as state lawmakers vote on a new budget including significant reforms to drug sentencing laws.

To mark tomorrow's historic vote, today's map is a county-by-county map of New York from the NYCLU and the justice Mapping Center. The map shows that more than 30% of prison admissions in many New York counties (both urban and rural) are currently related to drugs. Will these numbers begin to fall? We can only hope.

With these reforms of the Rockefeller Laws, drug addictions will once again be treated as a health problem. Law enforcement agencies can once again focus on preventing violent crime and serious property crime. Congratulations are in order for all of the members of the change.org community who played a part in advocating for the reform of the Rockefeller Laws over the last decade.

And just as the Rockefeller Laws started a trend that swept south and west, the reform of this law will have its effects across the country. Find out what's going on in your state here.

Leave a Comment

A National Movement for Drug Law Reform

by Russell Simmons

Published March 30, 2009 @ 04:45AM PT

Last week, hundreds of New Yorkers gathered outside the governor's office to call on our representatives in Albany to finalize the proposed Rockefeller drug law reforms. Watch the video above - the energy and drive of the people to reform destructive drug laws around the country is obvious.

All signs say that the pending reforms will be finalized this week. We have achieved a great victory for the people of New York and are inspired by the courageous leadership of Governor Paterson, Senator Smith and Assemblyman Silver. However, we must now go to work around the country to end the unjust drug laws in numerous other states and on the federal level.

Let's work together to change the direction in this country for a more just and fair judicial system.

Comments (41)

Extending Punishment Beyond Prison

by Brian Sullivan

category: Alternatives To Incarceration

Published March 28, 2009 @ 04:22AM PT

Our ability to get information about people's backgrounds has expanded massively in the past several years. Governmental agencies and private companies have relatively easy access to huge amounts of information about your personal history. This is a little unnerving for most people, and it raises some serious problems for individuals who have a criminal records. People with convictions, or even arrests, on their records are blocked from receiving certain benefits and necessities. In civil legal services, I constantly meet clients who are paying for their crimes long after their sentences are served. And it is not only convicted criminals who are paying: there are significant public costs associated with surveilling convicts and denying them benefits based on what we find.

I work mostly in housing, and old convictions constantly present barriers for my clients. City and state agencies frequently deem individuals with criminal records ineligible for public housing. Private landlords can use background check companies to screen tenants for criminal histories. These background screenings don't only pick up convictions; sometimes arrests or charges of which defendants are acquitted show up. Based on this information, landlords decide not to offer leases. This surveillance also takes place in the employment arena. A criminal conviction can make it difficult or impossible to get a professional license from the state. Like private landlords, employers make increasing use of background checks. If you have a criminal history it will be much harder to get a job. At the margins, this surveillance and discrimination on the basis of criminal record will force people into joblessness and homelessness.

The public cost of homelessness is massive. Coalition for the Homeless in New York City estimates the cost of housing a homeless individual in the shelter system at $23,000 per year. Similarly high costs are reported in other metropolitan areas. People in steady and long term public housing, on the other hand, are much less expensive to support. Similarly, joblessness is an expensive reality for cities and states. Large unemployment rolls cost municipalities huge sums of money in public benefits. Further, joblessness is a big contributing factor to recidivism. It makes sense that if you don't have a place to live, and you don't have a job, you would be more likely to commit another crime. To the extent that there is more crime there are likely to be more prisons funded by public bonds. In other words, a homeless person living in the shelters and without a job is much more expensive to the public than an employed person living in steady housing.

Because of these costs, our willingness to permit public and private background checking turns out to be a very expensive decision. When someone is denied public housing because of a criminal conviction, we have to pay for them to be sheltered. When someone is denied a job, we have to pay for certain public benefits and for the increase in crime that joblessness entails. And it is not just that this policy is expensive. It also results in social and physical segregation and stratification.

At the state level, agencies and courts should make it easier to demonstrate rehabilitation. Some level of background screening is probably necessary, but if someone has served their time we should make it easier for them to move on with their lives. The use of background checks by private companies should be more sharply regulated. Private organizations are not as easily subject to democratic control, and it doesn't make sense to subsidize their preferences by paying for their decisions.

Comments (19)

Friday Roundup: Fighting for Freedom

by Matt Kelley

category: Activism And Advocacy

Published March 27, 2009 @ 04:18PM PT

It's a sad fact, but you don't have to look far in this country to find a case in which a prisoner, with a credible claim of innocence, has been fighting for years to get a day in court. Here are few making news this week:

The appeals of the West Memphis 3, one of the most notorious wrongful convictions in American history, are still going, Damien Echols is still on death row, and he filed (again) for a new trial this week. More news on the WM3 is here.

Another of our country's best-known ongoing claims of innocence is the "yogurt shop murders" case in Austin. A judge this week scheduled a two-day hearing for May to consider new DNA evidence that could exonerate the two defendants still behind bars.

Comments (1)

Any Day Now: NY's Pending Drug Law Reform

by Matt Kelley

category: War On Drugs

Published March 27, 2009 @ 06:57AM PT

New York State lawmakers have apparently reached a tentative deal that would end the harsh mandatory minimums for drug offenders that have filled the state's prisons with non-violent offenders for nearly three decades. The news this morning is that the deal is not yet closed, but the New York Times reported yesterday that there's broad agreement among major players in talks to repeal the Rockefeller laws.

After the jump, take action to make sure the reforms don't get lost in the details.

Comments (3)

What's So Funny About Legalizing Pot?

by Matt Kelley

category: War On Drugs

Published March 27, 2009 @ 05:19AM PT

In the video above, you'll see President Barack Obama's response to the top question from web users in his online town hall yesterday morning. He was asked whether he'd consider legalizing marijuana to help grow the economy, and he laughed the question off.

"I don't know what this says about the online audience..." Obama chuckles, before dismissing the question with simple "No." Maybe what it shows about the online audience, Mr. President, is that when you open the floor for questions you get some good ideas that aren't popular in Washington.

The derision Obama showed for the idea points to just how far this movement needs to go. It's hard to advocate for the legalization of pot, because you won't be taken seriously. Even the President will laugh at you. This is the wrong message to send to people standing up for an idea that will eventually gain traction.

The marijuana legalization community is disappointed and angry with our President today. Sure, he can disagree with our ideas - we understand it will take years to make this idea a reality and that he's playing the popularity contest game. But to laugh at a policy reform supported by more than 30 percent of the population shows a level of disrespect for his supporters that I don't find appropriate.

Change.org community member Dawn West sent me a thoughtful reply to Obama's dismissal:

Comments (26)

Sen. Webb Calls for Big Changes in Criminal Justice

by Matt Kelley

category: Prison Reform

Published March 26, 2009 @ 04:18PM PT

Is it possible that we are finally on the verge of real reform in our criminal justice system? Could we look at a graph of the American prison population 20 years from today and see a peak right around 2009?

If I'm right and the combination of the stuggling economy, the new President and three decades of failed prison policies have finally brought about the chance for real change, then today could be a day to remember. A few hours ago, Sen. Jim Webb announced the National Criminal Justice Act of 2009, which would create a blue-ribbon commission to "look at every aspect of our criminal justice system with an eye toward reshaping the process from top to bottom." I know commissions sometimes just add to the D.C. babble, but those words are nice to hear from a U.S. Senator.

Webb, who has been outspoken for years on the failures of the criminal justice system, explains his politically risky - and badly needed - move in the cover story of this Sunday's Parade Magazine and on a new website launched by his staff to support the NCJA effort. He has an impressive coalition of Democratic support for the coalition including, reportedly, the President of the United States and Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.