logo
A presidential grant of clemency worthy of praise

A presidential grant of clemency worthy of praise

The Hill26-01-2025

A few days before he left office, President Biden commuted the sentences of about 2,500 drug offenders. The grant of clemency, Biden explained, 'provides relief for individuals who received lengthy sentences based on discredited distinctions between crack and powder cocaine, as well as outdated sentencing enhancements for drug crimes.' Those distinctions in turn created disparities between African Americans and whites throughout the criminal justice system.
A striking contrast to controversial, cringeworthy and contemptible presidential pardons and commutations recently granted to family members, donors, celebrities, political allies and supporters, Biden's action addressed misguided government policies that have persisted for decades. It also highlighted the damage politicians do when they feed and fuel voters' fears of violent crime waves in their communities.
As Biden no doubt recalls, he once boasted that every crime bill passed by Congress since 1976 'has had the name of the Democratic senator from the state of Delaware' on it. He supported the Anti-Drug Abuse Act (1986), which imposed a minimum five-year sentence for possession of five grams of crack cocaine and 500 grams of powder cocaine, the so-called 100-1 sentencing disparity that led to the incarceration of tens of thousands of Black people.
As chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Biden drafted the Senate version of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (1994), which included mandatory minimum sentences and a 'three-strike rule' requiring life imprisonment following the third conviction for a drug related crime.
'Lock the SOBs up,' Biden declared at the time. 'It doesn't matter whether or not they're the victims of society. I don't want to ask, 'What made them do this?' They must be taken off the streets.'
Federal drugs laws, which most states also adopted, accelerated mass incarceration. Between 1980 and 2018, the number of individuals in state and federal prisons for violating drug laws skyrocketed, from 25,000 to 300,000. Between 1988 and 2012, the length of prison terms for drug offenders increased by 153 percent.
By 1992, 91.4 percent of drug offenders in federal prison were African American. By 1995, 32 percent of all young Black men in the U.S. were on probation, in jail or prison. In 2024, African Americans, who make up about 11 percent of the population, constituted 38.9 percent of federal prison inmates. Between 1980 and 2013, spending on federal prisons shot up by almost 600 percent.
All this, even though the rate of violent crime peaked in 1991, crack cocaine use continued to decline and scientists concluded that, contrary to conventional wisdom, crack was not more potent than powder. Researchers found that most cocaine offenses do not involve weapons or bodily injury; the vast majority of those in prison are not drug kingpins, but street dealers and couriers who are rapidly replaced; there is no correlation between drug imprisonment rates in a particular state and rates of drug use; and mandatory minimum sentences are not a deterrent.
In response to these developments, the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 reduced the 100-1 crack-to-powder ratio to 18-1 and ended mandatory minimum sentencing for simple possession of cocaine. The First Step Act, signed by Trump in 2018, increased opportunities for inmates to earn credit toward early release or pre-release custody in home confinement or a residential reentry center. And the legislation allowed judges to sentence low-level, non-violent offenders with minor criminal records to less than the required mandatory minimum.
Former Attorney General Merrick Garland, noting that still-existing differences in sentencing have 'no basis in science, further no law enforcement purposes and drive unwanted disparities in our criminal justice system,' in 2022 directed prosecutors 'to promote the equivalent treatment in crack and powder cocaine offenses.'
Biden's commutation takes a fully justified next step. He has also announced his opposition to mandatory minimum sentences, private prisons and cash bail requirements, and support for expunging convictions for marijuana offenses.
Perhaps surprisingly, since worries persist about crime even though it has declined significantly over the last couple of years, a substantial majority of Americans favor ending mandatory minimum sentences and investing in probation, parole and substance abuse treatment.
What will President Trump, a tough-on-crime politician if ever there was one, do? Here's a guess: The First Step Act is not likely to be followed by a second step anytime soon. Maybe Trump would consider it in a third term?

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Freshman wishlist: Adam Schiff vs. Trump 2.0
Freshman wishlist: Adam Schiff vs. Trump 2.0

Axios

time38 minutes ago

  • Axios

Freshman wishlist: Adam Schiff vs. Trump 2.0

Sen. Adam Schiff has some advice for President Trump when attempting to demean him: Pick one nickname. Why it matters: Schiff rose to cable TV stardom as an anti-Trump foil while leading the first impeachment. "Shifty Schiff" or "Watermelon Head" learned to give as good as he got. Trump called Schiff names. Schiff ensured he was impeached — twice. "[T]he cardinal rule of nicknames is: Just stick with one," Schiff told Axios in an interview. Schiff translated his MAGA notoriety into a safe Senate seat, first battling through a tough, expensive primary. Now he's ready for round two with Trump. "I've been thrust back into a lot of that responsibility again because what he's trying to do in the second term is even worse than what he tried to do in the first term," Schiff said. Zoom out: Before Trump dominated the national conversation, Schiff considered himself a fairly nonpartisan national security expert. He endorsed Jim Mattis for Secretary of Defense in 2016 when other Democrats didn't. Schiff had hoped for another rebrand in the Senate. "I was expecting a Biden or a Harris presidency, and the ability to just focus exclusively on what positive things I could get done," he told Axios. What to watch: He is enjoying visiting redder areas of the state after spending years representing just a slice of heavily Democratic Los Angeles. He shared about one such visit in the state's northeast. "I knew I had made progress when one of the farmers looked at me and said, 'I don't know why he calls you watermelon head. You have a perfectly normal-sized head.'" But it's doubtful he'll revert back to a less partisan posture, given the direction of Trump's second term. Driving the news: Two days after our interview, Trump deployed National Guard troops to tamp down on ICE protests in Los Angeles in opposition to Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-Calif.). "This action is designed to inflame tensions, sow chaos, and escalate the situation," Schiff posted on X on Saturday. He also repeatedly called for violence to stop at protests. "Assaulting law enforcement is never ok," he posted Sunday. Zoom in: Schiff tried to pass a resolution shortly before our interview to stop the administration from stripping civil rights leader Harvey Milk's name from a Navy ship. He has demanded financial disclosures from the White House, written letters to stop DOGE from shutting down USDA offices and tried to block the repeal of EV rules. "Most of my days are spent trying to walk this line between stopping the administration from violating the law and ignoring the Constitution on the one hand," Schiff said, "and continuing to deliver for Californians..." Schiff recognizes that his clashes altered his career trajectory. "I have my brand pre-Trump and my brand post-Trump," Schiff told Axios. Between the lines: Schiff's leadership in the House's first Trump impeachment made him a mortal enemy to Trump and his allies, leading to a "weirdly personal" dynamic, Schiff said.

"No Kings!" anti-Trump protests planned around Utah
"No Kings!" anti-Trump protests planned around Utah

Axios

time38 minutes ago

  • Axios

"No Kings!" anti-Trump protests planned around Utah

Protestors are taking to Utah's streets on Saturday in what organizers expect will be the largest single-day anti-Trump rally since the start of the administration. Why it matters: The widespread movement will run counter to President Trump's multimillion dollar military parade in D.C. "No Kings is a nationwide day of defiance," organizers wrote. "From city blocks to small towns, from courthouse steps to community parks, we're taking action to reject authoritarianism." The intrigue: Although no anti-Trump rally in Utah has matched the size of the "Hands Off!" protest on April 5, the movement is growing to smaller cities in more conservative parts of the state. Zoom in: At least 11 marches and rallies were scheduled throughout Utah as of Monday. Salt Lake City: 10am at the U's Marriott Library Plaza and 6pm at Pioneer Park. Ogden: 1pm at Union Station. Heber City: 11am at City Hall. Provo: 9am at 445 W. Center Price: Noon at 350 E. Main Ephraim: 11am at the former Kent's Market parking lot Moab: 9:15am at Swanny City Park Boulder: 11am at the town park Kanab: 10am at Jacob Hamblin Park St. George: 2pm at Vernon Worthen Park What they're saying:"Donald Trump wants tanks in the street and a made-for-TV display of dominance for his birthday," the No Kings website said. "Real power isn't staged in Washington. It rises up everywhere else." By the numbers: Millions of people are estimated to protest in more than 1,500 cities across all 50 states, organizers said. Context: Trump's military parade coincides with his 79th birthday and the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary. The Army expects to spend $25 million to $45 million, an estimate that doesn't include Secret Service or law enforcement. Trump has been pushing for a military parade since his first term. Yes, but: There is no protest planned in Washington, D.C. That is "a deliberate choice to keep the focus on contrast, and not give the Trump administration an opportunity to stoke and then put the focus on conflict," said Leah Greenberg, co-executive director of Indivisible, one of the groups coordinating the demonstration.

Sen. Mike Lee, House conservatives demand changes to Trump's tax bill
Sen. Mike Lee, House conservatives demand changes to Trump's tax bill

Yahoo

time40 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Sen. Mike Lee, House conservatives demand changes to Trump's tax bill

WASHINGTON — Fiscal conservatives are demanding a number of changes to the Republican-led reconciliation package, including the elimination of some provisions that were key to getting the bill through Republicans' slim majority in the House last month. The House Freedom Caucus began circulating a memo Monday evening outlining dozens of changes to the tax package, which passed the House in a narrow 215-214 vote in late May. The bill is now being considered by the Senate, but House conservatives have made it clear they are not satisfied with the final product — and are demanding their colleagues in the upper chamber make edits. 'Through the negotiations in the House and the hard work of the President and the White House, we took significant steps to improve the reconciliation package known as 'One Big Beautiful Bill,'' the memo reads, according to a copy obtained by the Deseret News. 'However, there remain substantial concerns and a great deal of misinformation circulating about the bill. … Below, please find specific recommendations for the Senate to deliver a product we can pass in the House.' At the top of the list — underneath a headline that reads: 'The Senate Needs to Improve the House OBBB' — the fiscal conservatives are demanding Senate Republicans find deeper spending cuts than those included in the current resolution. The tax reconciliation package currently allows for up to $3.7 trillion in tax cuts over the next decade, according to projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. However, the bill includes only $1.3 trillion in spending cuts to offset those costs, raising concerns among Republicans that the package will raise the national debt. While GOP leaders, including Utah Rep. Blake Moore, argue the report doesn't factor in the economic growth that will likely come from the tax cuts tucked into the package, members of the Freedom Caucus say 'savings are backloaded and are subject to the whims of a future Congress, heavily affected by future policy changes and tax extensions, and unlikely to fully occur.' Notably, the conservatives are also demanding the Senate scale back an agreed-upon increase to federal deductions for state and local taxes paid, also known as SALT. Republican leaders offered to increase the current deduction cap to $40,000 — up from the current $10,000 limit — for individuals who make $500,000 or less a year. That cap would then increase by 1% every year over the next decade and remain permanent after that period. The policy mostly affects high-tax states, but the changes were made to appease a group of blue-state Republicans who repeatedly threatened final passage if a higher deduction was not included. Members of the House Freedom Caucus have pushed to undo that deal, arguing it 'disproportionately benefits high-income households in high tax (Democrat-run) states,' according to the memo. That's unlikely to go over well with the faction of New York Republicans who spent months negotiating a SALT increase. Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., who helped lead that charge, has warned for weeks that if the Senate changes the numbers, he and his fellow New York Republicans would reject the bill. 'Cool. Good luck with that,' Lawler said in a post on X shortly after the memo was released. The memo also urges Senate Republicans to 'hold the line' on certain provisions included in the House version, including language that would fully repeal green energy credits passed by the Biden administration through the Inflation Reduction Act. 'Hold the line on the House OBBB reforms to significantly strengthen the rollback of IRA subsidies for wind and solar to end during President Trump's term — otherwise they will inevitability be renewed as in the past,' the memo states, 'and, by that point, the grid will become generally unreliable with no quick fixes to inevitable widespread unaffordability and power outages.' That demand comes in response to a push by some Republicans in the Senate — including Utah Sen. John Curtis — who want to preserve some of the clean energy tax incentives in the IRA, arguing they are crucial for Trump's agenda to remain energy independent. Conservatives are similarly pushing for deeper cuts to Medicaid benefits, outlining specific changes that would 'protect the most vulnerable' while addressing 'money laundering, fraud, and abuse.' Suggested language would be to implement specific definitions to crack down on Medicaid coverage for undocumented immigrants as well as stricter work requirements for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. The demands come as Senate Republicans have hinted at major changes to the House-passed reconciliation bill — with some suggesting to ease the deep spending cuts already passed while others have argued the package does not go far enough. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has been at the forefront of demanding those changes, telling the Deseret News that 'everyone understands there are going to be some modifications made to the House bill.' 'Nobody believes that the House bill, unadorned, unmodified, is going to pass,' he said. For example, Lee supports maintaining the full repeal of the IRA green energy credits as well as cracking down on illegal immigrants relying on Medicaid. Meanwhile, the president is telling the Senate to 'make the changes they want' — sending mixed messages as Republicans consider alterations to the budget framework advancing policies on the border, energy, national defense and tax reform. Some of the hard-to-convince lawmakers hope their stubbornness will ward off any of their Senate colleagues from making drastic changes, noting the drawn-out process in the House should deter them from doing so. 'I think after seeing how painful of a process this is and how difficult it is to get anything through this side, I think that will send a strong message in the Senate that you can't really change it,' Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., a member of the Freedom Caucus, told the Deseret News last month. Contributing: Brigham Tomco

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store