Relaxation of Mandatory Minimum Laws
Student Name
University
Course
Professor Name
Date
Walker, L. S., & Mezuk, B. (2018). Mandatory minimum sentencing policies and cocaine use in the US, 1985–2013. BMC international health and human rights, 18(1), 1-10.
The article demonstrates how the United States federal government changed its ranking for the execution of mandatory minimum sentences for illegal substance crimes. Walker & Mezuk (2018) argues that the mandatory minimum sentencing was not something which was a very real technique for discouraging the use of cocaine because cocaine use is usually fuelled by influences not related to sentencing policy. The mandatory minimum sentencing has been used with the aim of targeting offenses observed as very disruptive. Therefore, the efficacy of using these laws to decrease the aimed behavior has remained very unclear.
Reisinger. Nathaniel W. (2019). Redrawing the line: Retroactive sentence reductions, mass incarceration, and the battle between justice and finality. Harv. CR-CLL Rev., 54, 299.
In the article, the supreme court of the United States said that Congress possesses single responsibility for coming up with lines between the finality as well as justice sentencing. Reisinger (2018) argues that the moment Congress permits a law decreasing the sentence, it should also decide if to apply all those decreases retroactively or to agree to take the sentence inequalities between pre as well as post restructurings wrongdoers that will influence the outcome inescapably. Therefore, Congress is reducing the sentencing disparities while putting a restricted strain on judicial as well as prosecutorial resources. Thus, retroactive sentence reduction quickens decarceration as well as restores a suitable balance between finality and justice in the regime of federal sentencing.
Schwaeble, K. (2020). The Diffusion of Narratives: Merging the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) & Policy Diffusion Using the Case of Mandatory Sentencing Reform. North Carolina State University.
The article demonstrates how mandatory minimum sentencing reforms have shown different trends within the law. In Connecticut, a policy that was passed in 2001 relaxed mandatory minimum laws for the ownership as well as the sale of drugs. In Michigan, in 2002, canceled its substance mandatory minimum that adjusted lifetime probation to a period of five years hence building new sentencing guidelines. Schwaeble (2020) argues that Maine in 2002 decreased the mandatory minimum sentence for cases of killing from twenty-five years to twenty years and sanctionedcourts to append mandatory sentences which show substantial injustice as well as that, will not endanger the safety of the public.
Gorga, J. M. (2020). Retribution, Not a Solution: Drug-Induced Homicide in North Carolina. Campbell L. Rev., 42, 161.
From the article, the laws that were put in place to reduce the crimes associated with the substance or drug use. Gorga (2020) argues that mandatory minimums are ineffective in reducing crimes, and the federal government has started repealing the mandatory minimum sentencing laws on drug abuse offenders. Further, some states have decided to relax the laws which have been put in place concerning drug abuse. Gorga (2020) claims that some states have relaxed their drug laws.
Parker, A. M., Strunk, D., & Fiellin, D. A. (2018). State responses to the opioid crisis. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 46(2), 367-381.
The article aims at the responses of numerous states to the opioid crisis. States have commonly relaxed drug laws that effect people who are not involved with the opioid crisis.Parker, Strunk, & Fiellin (2018) argue that some states have adjusted mandatory minimum laws to give biggerhumanity. Therefore, these laws permitthe states to give different responses to the opioid crisis. The states have different responses to the opioid crisis as some states have relaxed their mandatory minimum sentencing on offenders while others have not.
Nir, E., & Liu, S. (2022). The Challenge of Imposing Just Sentences Under Mandatory Minimum Statutes: A Qualitative Study of Judicial Perceptions. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 33(2), 177–205. https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034211030555
The mandatory minimum sentencing in numerous jurisdictions in the United States is convincing the juries to put very strict incarceration terms. Some states have relaxed mandatory minimum sentences for particular drug crimes. Nir & Liu (2022)claim that Michigan eradicated many of its mandatory minimum drug laws. Many judges will differ in sentencing approaches and their perceptions of mandatory minimum statutes. Therefore, some states have relaxed mandatory minimum sentences for particular drug crimes. Thus, not all the states have relaxed their mandatory minimum sentencing as they trust that the law does not reduce drug abuse crimes.
Hofer, P. J. (2019). Federal sentencing after Booker. Crime and Justice, 48(1), 137-186.
In the article, Booker made the judges start rejecting unsound guidelines. There was an increase in sentencing under guidelines ranges which came from the whole relaxation of the guideline’s limitations than from coherent rejections of guidelines that are unsound. Hofer (2019) claims that the revoke of statutory mandatory minimums, as well as numerous unique statutory directives to the commission, will allow the federal sentencing reforms to perform as planned. The relaxation of statutory mandatory minimum sentencing on the different offenses depends on the reforms which have been put on the unsound guidelines.
Craigie, T. & Zapryanova, M. (2021). Mandatory Minimum Reforms, Sentencing, and Racial-Ethnic Disparities. The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 21(4), 1289-1318. https://doi.org/10.1515/bejeap-2020-0215
The article states that in the last twenty years, many states, as well as the federal government, have ratified mandatory minimum reforms for drug crimes. Many of the reforms that have been put in place in the states are made to lower the drug sentences. In many states level, mandatory minimum reforms do not decrease drug sentences in overall. Craigie & Zapryanova (2021) argues that thoughtful racialprejudice glowed by states level mandatory minimums is not entirely enriched by succeeding reforms at state levels.Therefore, some states have put in place reforms to lower drug abuse sentences.
Lassiter, M. D. (2015). Impossible criminals: The suburban imperatives of America’s war on drugs. Journal of American History, 102(1), 126-140.
The article demonstrates that the American political systemdetermined all the dilemmas by reducing the penalties for the possession of marijuana while increasing mandatory minimum sentencing. Lassiter (2015) argues that misdemeanor possession law has reserved unembellished mandatory minimum law for the distribution of marijuana. Therefore, there has been a reduction in the penalties for individuals who possess marijuana. There has been a relaxation of mandatory minimum sentencing for substance use offenders.
Bowman III, F. O. (2015). Good Enough to Be Getting on With: The State of Federal Sentencing Legislation, December 2015. Fed. Sent’g Rep., 28, 105.
The article states that Congress materially has changed correction policies as well as federal sentencing. Congress appeared on the borders of passing important restrictions on the use of mandatory minimum sentences and offering the start of a generous, flexible machine for the back-end proclamation of federal prisoners. Further, the article explains broadly used reforms of mandatory minimum sentences to the administrationof high and complex limitingguidelines relaxing mandatory minimum sentences for the uncertain subsection of federal offenders. Therefore, the reforms put in place adjust the mandatory minimum sentences.
Bjerk, D. (2017). Mandatory minimums and the sentencing of federal drug crimes. The Journal of Legal Studies, 46(1), 93-128.
The United States federal mandatory minimum sentences are known to be debatablebecause of the mandatory sentence’s length for the offenders. Many of the mandatory minimum sentences length increase, although the consequences are not matching across the drug offenses. The author argues that the crack offenders’ sentences are commonly long and, in most cases, they are not obstructed by suitability for the mandatory minimum. The mandatory minimum usually depends on the offenses of the offender.
Trends in Criminal Justice. (2022). Retrieved from https://bestwritingservice.com/essays/Law/trends-in-criminal-justice.html.
Since there has been an increase in the number of prisoners over the years, numerous states have decided to look for an alternative way of decreasing the pressure on correctional facilities. Primarily, lawmakers thought that the long sentence imposition would dishearten crimes (“Trends in Criminal Justice”, 2022). Furthermore, many statistics demonstrate that long sentences adversely cost nations. Thus, the number of years in prison has been decreased in most crimes. For instance, lawmakers decreased the number of compulsory years of imprisonment for substance abuse lawbreakers. Thus, the same adjustment heartened the use of probation programs to correct the offenders.