Mandatory Drug Sentences and its Impact on Women

By

ABSTRACT

Mandatory minimum sentencing laws have existed since 1951 under the Boggs Act that compelled greatest criminal punishments for violations of the import/export and internal income laws identified with pills. The Boggs Act additionally settled mandatory minimum prison sentences. Compliant with the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986, the latest mandatory minimum law, Congress secured fundamental sentencing levels for break cocaine offenses. Congress revised 21 U.s.c. §841 to accommodate a 100:1 proportion in the amounts of powder and break cocaine that trigger an mandatory minimum law. This research study blankets the period 1986 through 2005, and inspects the effect of compulsory least sentencing on poor urban African American ladies indicted and detained on split cocaine offenses.

INTRODUCTION

Since 1986, there has been an increase in the number of African American females locked up for crack cocaine offenses as a result of mandatory minimum sentencing laws. These crack cocaine sentencing laws are based on a “fixed” time or “determinate” prison sentence that is not compatible with the crime itself. Therefore, these laws need to be reformed. This problem is addressed in this research study because it has been demonstrated that substance abuse treatment is more effective than incarceration. For instance, according to the Washington State Institute for Public Policy, the return on treatment for substance abuse is $18.52 whereas prisons' investment is only $.37. In addition, this problem is addressed because of its adverse impact on African American families and communities, which ultimately cost the society more in terms of social services and crime. Nearly 9 in 10 individuals admitted to prison under Maryland's mandatory sentencing minimum laws in the past 5 years were African American. This work is a case study analysis in Prince George's County, Maryland (“County”) and argues that mandatory minimum sentencing has a devastating impact on offenders, families, and state financial resources (Yeh & Doyle, 2009).

Policy makers are made aware of alternatives to incarceration particularly as it relates to cost and/or funding. Families would benefit from alternative sentencing because they would have access to loved ones instead of having them warehoused in prisons. This assumes that there would be appropriate supervision of ex-offenders by the criminal justice system. Drug offenders will benefit because of drug treatment that is needed in order to reduce crime and recidivism. The state benefits because of less monetary outlays to fund and support the high cost of imprisonment. This research study will provide the “voices” of African American women who have experienced prison as a result of crack cocaine offenses. Their stories will bring life to how mandatory minimum sentencing affects nonviolent, poor, Black, women who live in poverty stricken urban areas. The stories told by these women can illustrate the fear, isolation, and stresses experienced as a result of their involvement with drugs and the criminal justice system (Van Wormer et.al, 2007).

There are few academic studies that address the problem of crack cocaine and African American females in Prince George's County, Maryland, as well as ...