A Perspective on the Proposed Amendments to the Drug Distribution Guideline

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 252-257
Author(s):  
Kevin Bennardo
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Drug Trafficking ◽  
Drug Distribution ◽  
Drug Offenders ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Federal Sentencing ◽  
Mandatory Minimums ◽  
Level Reduction ◽  
The U.S

This Commentary provides a perspective on the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s proposed amendment to the drug distribution guideline. The proposed amendment has the potential to substantially affect federal sentencing and incarceration because of the sheer volume of advisory sentencing ranges that are calculated through the drug distribution guideline. Although the proposed almost-across-the-board offense level reduction is laudable, the Commission should go further in its amendment of the drug distribution guideline. First, the proposed amendment reduces most of the offense levels in the Drug Quantity Table by two levels, but it does not alter the offense levels for distributions of the smallest and largest drug quantities. The amendment would be more internally consistent if the Commission simply reduced the offense levels applicable to the entire Drug Quantity Table by two levels. Second, the amendment continues to base the offense levels in the Drug Quantity Table on the mandatory minimums in the drug trafficking statute. The Commission should delink the Drug Quantity Table from the mandatory minimums. An increasing number of drug defendants escape the operation of otherwise-applicable mandatory minimum sentences, particularly in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Alleyne v. United States and the Attorney General’s directive to federal prosecutors to structure indictments to avoid mandatory minimums for certain low-level, non-violent drug offenders. Fairness dictates that these offenders receive a advisory sentencing range that reflects the Commission’s research and expertise rather than one that is bound to inapplicable statutory mandatory minimums.

scholarly journals Cuba, United States and fight against drug trafficking: ups and downs of a necessary cooperation

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 54-64
Author(s):  
Santiago E. Bejerano
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Drug Trafficking ◽  
The United States ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
Modern World ◽  
American Continent ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Alternative Scenarios ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Common Security

Given the geostrategic importance of Cuba for the entire American continent and the increasing complexity of the nature of security as such, and accordingly, of the mechanisms of ensuring it in the modern world, the problem of drug trafficking is rather high on the agenda of the U.S.-Cuban relations. The article examines the issue of combating drug trafficking in the context of bilateral relations between Cuba and the United States in order to assess the prospects for joint efforts on this track. The author presents a retrospective of mostly unilateral initiatives by U.S. presidents that did not lead to real tangible results, in particular due to the prevailing erroneous approach of militarization in the fight against drug trafficking. The new century requires new forms and a qualitatively higher level of interaction. With a noticeable warming in the dialogue with Cuba under Barack Obama the situation has changed in many respects, and quite a few initiatives of bilateral nature began to bear fruit. Nevertheless, with Donald Trump’s rise to power, there is an obvious setback in the rapprochement, in proof of which the author gives examples of specific destructive steps, although this position of the administration met if not open criticism, then proposals for alternative scenarios of the development of contacts between the states. The potential that exists in both countries for cooperation in this area can be realized provided that the interests of common security prevail over political disagreements and state channels of cooperation are strengthened, with the dynamics of this process being reflected in the situation in the region as a whole.

Sentencing in Chaos

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 128-137
Author(s):  
Mark H. Allenbaugh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Criminal History ◽  
Interquartile Range ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Federal Sentencing ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Statistical Survey ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Relevant Factors

Antonin Scalia famously observed in his dissent in United States v. Booker that an advisory sentencing guidelines regime would result in a “discordant symphony” where similarly situated offenders would receive ad hoc sentences. As this article demonstrates through a statistical survey, he was right. Federal sentencing practice is in chaos. The fundamental goals of the guidelines—uniformity, proportionality, and certainty—have been undermined. Nonetheless, this does not mean the guidelines should be abandoned or a wholesale redrafting is required. As it turns out, the guidelines continue to be a useful tool, not for determining the ultimate sentence per se, but for identifying similarly situated offenders. Using the total offense level, criminal history category, and other relevant factors discussed in the article, a sentencing judge can identify those individuals within the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s datafiles matching those criteria. From there, a judge can determine various relevant statistics to consider when imposing a sentence: most importantly, the Interquartile Range (IQR). The IQR defines the central range of sentences imposed on similarly situated offenders. Sentencing within the IQR will necessarily promote the guidelines fundamental goals and thus harmonize federal sentencing. But the upshot of this approach also demonstrates that it is the sentencing table, and not the guidelines overall, that are in need of fundamental revision. This article concludes that the Commission should recalibrate the sentencing table downward to match current sentencing practice.

The Reform Commission

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 258-262
Author(s):  
Todd Haugh
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Drug Trafficking ◽  
The United States ◽  
Institutional Structure ◽  
Reform Movement ◽  
Reform Initiatives ◽  
Federal Sentencing ◽  
The Past ◽  
Sentencing Reform

The United States Sentencing Commission has drawn much criticism over the years. Stakeholders have impugned the institutional structure of the Commission and the operation of the Guidelines, and they’ve even attacked the Commissioners themselves. While many of the criticisms are undoubtedly due, the current Commission has advanced a series of noteworthy reform initiatives aimed at reducing sentences. The most visible is the Commission’s recent proposed amendment that would lessen drug trafficking sentences across the board, but there are others. Because of the Commission’s efforts, which have led and capitalized on the reform movement, federal sentencing is on the cusp of becoming less punitive, less costly, and much less flawed than it has been in over a generation. In this essay, I briefly catalog the Commission’s recent efforts to reduce sentences, and explain how it has used nimble strategy to advance reform consistent with the agency’s values but also in a way most likely to succeed. I then offer some insights into why the Commission is now asserting itself more strongly as to sentencing reform than it has in the past, a welcome trend that I hope continues.

Revising Federal Sentencing Policy: Some Consequences of Expanding Eligibility for Alternative Sanctions

1996 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaine Wolf ◽  
Marsha Weissman
Keyword(s):  
Full Scale ◽  
National Council ◽  
Low Level ◽  
Federal Sentencing ◽  
Sentencing Reform ◽  
Second Look ◽  
Sentencing Policy ◽  
Crime And Delinquency ◽  
Alternative Sanctions ◽  
The U.S

Although the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 advocated the use of “least restrictive alternatives,” the U.S. Sentencing Commission has devised guidelines that authorize prison for all felony convictions. Nonincarcerative sentences are available for low-level offenders, but research has shown that the use of probation and other alternative sanctions has declined since the full-scale adoption of the guidelines in 1989. Applying criteria for imposing sentences of imprisonment adopted by the National Council on Crime and Delinquency to U.S. Sentencing Commission data from 1992 and 1993, we show that a large number of cases in the federal caseload that were considered ineligible for nonincarcerative sanctions may merit “a second look” and be considered for alternative sentences.

It's Alive! The Federal Booker-Fix Debate Stirs

2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 335-337
Author(s):  
Frank O. Bowman, III
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Federal Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Federal Sentencing ◽  
Legislative Action ◽  
Near Term ◽  
Institutional Actors ◽  
The U.S

These Editor's Observations introduce Volume 24, Number 5 of the Federal Sentencing Reporter, an issue devoted to renewed discussion in Congress and the U.S. Sentencing Commission about whether there is a need for legislative action to revise or replace the advisory federal sentencing guidelines system judicially created by the U.S. Supreme Court's 2005 decision in United States v. Booker. It describes the basic positions of the main institutional actors, briefly summarizes the articles in the issue, and makes a prediction about the likelihood of action in the near term.

scholarly journals U.S. Arrest of Former Mexican Defense Minister on Drug Charges Poses Challenges for Future Counter-Narcotics Cooperation

2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (2) ◽  
pp. 334-340
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Drug Trafficking ◽  
The United States ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Legal Assistance ◽  
Mutual Legal Assistance ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
The U.S

In October 2020, the United States arrested former Mexican Defense Secretary General Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda on drug conspiracy charges, accusing him of accepting bribes to aid a Mexican cartel in evading law enforcement and transporting drugs into the United States. Cienfuegos's arrest sparked diplomatic protests from Mexico, which negotiated to gain Cienfuegos's release before exonerating him and publicizing the U.S. investigation file in what the United States called a breach of the countries’ mutual legal assistance treaty. The incident also prompted Mexico to pass a new law curtailing cooperation with foreign agents and potentially imperiling the long-standing U.S.-Mexico alliance in the fight against cross-border drug trafficking.

An American Language

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosina Lozano
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spanish Language ◽  
Spanish Speakers ◽  
Language Recognition ◽  
Political Language ◽  
Political Issue ◽  
History Of ◽  
The U.S

An American Language is a political history of the Spanish language in the United States. The nation has always been multilingual and the Spanish language in particular has remained as an important political issue into the present. After the U.S.-Mexican War, the Spanish language became a language of politics as Spanish speakers in the U.S. Southwest used it to build territorial and state governments. In the twentieth century, Spanish became a political language where speakers and those opposed to its use clashed over what Spanish's presence in the United States meant. This book recovers this story by using evidence that includes Spanish language newspapers, letters, state and territorial session laws, and federal archives to profile the struggle and resilience of Spanish speakers who advocated for their language rights as U.S. citizens. Comparing Spanish as a language of politics and as a political language across the Southwest and noncontiguous territories provides an opportunity to measure shifts in allegiance to the nation and exposes differing forms of nationalism. Language concessions and continued use of Spanish is a measure of power. Official language recognition by federal or state officials validates Spanish speakers' claims to US citizenship. The long history of policies relating to language in the United States provides a way to measure how U.S. visions of itself have shifted due to continuous migration from Latin America. Spanish-speaking U.S. citizens are crucial arbiters of Spanish language politics and their successes have broader implications on national policy and our understanding of Americans.

A Good Sentencing Precedent is Hard to Find

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 138-144
Author(s):  
Brian A. Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Significant Role ◽  
College Admissions ◽  
The Body ◽  
Federal Law ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Federal Sentencing

In federal criminal cases, federal law requires that judges consider the sentences other courts have imposed in factually similar matters. Courts and parties, however, face significant challenges in finding applicable sentencing precedents because judges do not typically issue written sentencing opinions, and transcripts of sentencings are not readily available in advanced searchable databases. At the same time, particularly since the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in United States v. Booker, sentencing precedent has come to play a significant role in federal sentencing proceedings. By way of example, this article discusses recent cases involving defendants with gambling addictions, and recent cases involving college admissions or testing fraud. The article explores the ways the parties in those cases have used sentencing precedent in their advocacy, as well as the ways the courts involved have used sentencing precedent to justify their decisions. Given the important role of sentencing precedent in federal criminal cases, the article finally looks at ways in which the body of sentencing law could be made more readily available to parties and courts alike.

Palestine Unbound

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 130-134
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Task Force ◽  
The United States ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Tel Aviv ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intention To Move ◽  
Arab Israeli Conflict ◽  
The U.S

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document