"Snitch" Breeds New Light into Drug Sentencing Laws

I’m not much of a film critic, but every now and then I see a movie that inspires me to put my thoughts down into words. Last night, I saw the latest Dwayne Johnson screenplay “Snitch”, which tells the story of a college bound teen who makes a poor decision to earn some fast cash and ends up facing a minimum sentence of 10+ years in federal prison. I’m not going to ruin the plot with this post so I will stick to the issue of mandatory sentencing laws because I think such an important issue deserves at the very least a public discourse on the matter.

Harsh prison sentences for violent offenders are appropriate when the punishment fits the crime. The age-old principle “an eye for an eye” teaches us that a person who injures another should be punished to a similar degree. Occasionally the theoretical framework that characterizes our criminal justice system exposes itself to invariable flaws that deserve correction. FAMM, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, is an organization that advocates for “fair and proportionate sentencing laws that allow judicial discretion while maintaining public safety.” The organization addresses the consequences of the 1986 mandatory minimums for drug violations law and the expansion of those laws in 1988 which applies to drug conspiracies. According to the legislation, sentencing is determined solely by the weight and type of drug, ignoring other important factors including the role of traffickers in the movement of drugs.

Given the inherently diverse nature of illegal activity related to the distribution of illegal drugs, a one size fits all sentencing law fails to weigh the specifics of each case in order to apply appropriate sentences. As Justice Anthony Kennedy puts it, “In too many cases, mandatory minimum sentences are unwise and unjust.” They are doing little to solve the nation’s war on drugs and the law has led to a severe overcrowding problem in prisons across the country. While the law’s intention to capture kingpins in drug conspiracies was enacted in good faith, it has resulted in placing non-violent first-time offenders behind bars for decades, while the drug lords responsible for the mass movement of illegal substances remain free to continue their activities. That simply is not justice.

FAMM’s profiles of those adversely affected by the law are available here. Unfortunately, even one of these cases is unacceptable and its time for lawmakers to come to the table and reevaluate the effectiveness of minimum sentencing as it relates to America’s War on Drugs.