A collective of civil, political and human rights groups want the mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines dealing with crack cocaine reviewed by Congress. A letter signed by the leaders of the individual organizations requesting the review on Feb. 16 was sent to members of the Senate and House Judiciary Committee.
The letter was preceded by a policy briefing held at the Rayburn House Office Building. Among the participants at the briefing were Marc Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project, Jesslyn McCurdy, legislative director of the American Civil Liberties Union, Eric Sterling, former counsel to the House Judiciary Committee and Nkechi Taifa, senior policy adviser at the Open Policy Center. These organizations are under an umbrella group called the Justice Roundtable.
Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) and Bobby Scott (D-Va.) stopped by the gathering to give their thoughts and support.
"This is the real issue of civil rights," Rangel said. "This is the real issue of human rights."
"Taking a look at this issue is something we really need to do," Scott said. "This disparity cannot continue."
According to U.S. Sentencing Commission:
*80.8 percent of crack cocaine defendants in 2003 were Black, despite the fact that more than 66 percent of crack cocaine users in the U.S. were White or Latino.
*Black drug offenders have a 20 percent greater chance of being sentenced to prison than White offenders.
*Between 1994 and 2003, the average time served by Blacks for a drug offense increased by 77 percent, compared to an increase of 28 percent for White drug offenders.
The letter stated that:
"We recognize that two decades ago, little was known about crack, other than vague perceptions that this new derivative form of cocaine was more dangerous than its original powder form, would significantly threaten public health, and greatly increase drug-related violence. Since that time, copious documentation and analysis by the U.S. Sentencing Commission have revealed that many assertions were not supported by sound data and, in retrospect, were exaggerated or simply incorrect."
Taifa said there is a perception that if people would stop using crack cocaine, the problem would go away.
"That is not right," she said. "The drug laws punishments do not fit the crime.
"Let's say that you had Tyrone, a Black man and Mr. Charlie, a White man.
"Tyrone and Mr. Charlie could be doing the same things in terms of selling crack cocaine, but Tyrone would be punished severely because he is doing it, for the most part, out in the open in the inner city.
"But Mr. Charlie sells his crack cocaine in the suburbs, perhaps out of his office or condo. He is likely not to get caught and can get away with it for a long time.
"Even if both are caught, Tyrone will likely go to prison while Mr. Charlie may be able to get a better deal because he has more money and can skirt the guidelines."
Taifa said the problem of crack cocaine is really a medical issue, not one for the judicial system.
Taifa said she is taking the matter to another level. On March 3, a hearing on the racial disparity of the crack cocaine guidelines will be presented to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights during its 124th Period of Sessions.
"We allege that mandatory minimum sentences violate protected rights found in the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man -- specifically, the right to equal protection of the law, the right to a fair trial, and the right to judicial protection against violations of fundamental rights," Taifa said in a letter to the commission.
Former ACLU-Washington office leader Laura Murphy said "the time for talk is over and it's time to get to work on this issue."
The AFRO contacted the offices of Rep. James Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), who are the chairmen of the judiciary committees of their respective bodies. Both offices said hearings are not scheduled on the crack cocaine guidelines at this time.