'Shocking loss': Supreme Court ruling on crack sentences keeps drug offenders behind bars
By - Bundeschef
Hey /u/Bundeschef, thanks for contributing to /r/nottheonion. Unfortunately, your post was removed as it violates our rules:
**Rule 2** - Sorry, but this story isn't oniony.
Please consider submitting your article to /r/offbeat or similar subreddits unless it truly reads like The Onion wrote it. The title and article itself must both be "Oniony". This can be highly subjective; you are encouraged to upvote articles that should be here and downvote those that should not. Moderators can also remove posts at their own discretion under this rule.
Please read the [sidebar](http://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/about/sidebar) and [rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/about/rules) before posting again. If you have questions or concerns, please [message the moderators through modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/nottheonion&subject=&message=). Thank you!
“The court, in a 9-0 decision written by Justice Clarence Thomas, said the First Step Act was limited by a technical omission: It left out the lowest rung of offenders.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out the discrepancy in a concurring opinion, noting that the law's sponsors urged the court to rule that it be applied to low-level offenders. But the law itself said something different, she wrote, an "injustice" that can be corrected only by Congress.”
“Mark Holden, chairman of the board of Americans for Prosperity, a conservative policy group, who pushed for the First Step Act, agreed, saying Congress should pass a law making the relief for low-level offenders unambiguous.”
Translation: we recognize this doesn’t effect the lowest offenders but it’s not the courts job to change the law rather to interpret. Congress do you freaking job
Yeah this was the opposite of shocking.
This doesn't fit the sub.
Are there even mods here? I'm going to unfollow soon because of how sick I am of these idiots who think that any news story comes of as satire or irony.
This isn't even remotely shocking.
It was a 9-0 decision because the law literally did not include these people. It explicitly failed to do so.
Congress is free to pass a different law if they want to but the courts cannot write legislation.
Gotta get your free labor somehow and since slavery is banned...
Slavery is not banned.
The 13th amendment reads as follows:
>Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Its pretty clear that slavery and involuntary servitude is explicitly permitted in the united states provided that they have been convicted of any crime.
False. Slavery is 100% banned.
Forced labor as punishment for a crime is legal.
Forced labour sounds like slavery under a new name
Involuntary servitude is not always slavery. Slavery has a more narrow definition. Slavery is always Involuntary servitude, but Involuntary servitude is not always Slavery.
Chattel slavery is probably the definition of slavery you have in mind when you say slavery but thats just a specific type of slavery it doesnt represent all slavery. There have been societies where slaves had rights and a path to citizenship/freedom so im not sure what narrow definition of slavery you are referring to unless your talking about the specific chattel style slavery of america.
But you never said chattel slavery is banned in america you said all slavery is banned because you only use slavery as a punishment which is like me saying that all physical abuse is illegal except for physical abuse as punishment because thats just a punishment its not really physical abuse which just doesnt make any sense to me.
Just because your government has a monopoly on violence it doesnt mean violence is illegal it just means its a reserved right of the state. If the state reserves the right to slavery as a punishment then slavery is not illegal in that state its just a right held only by the state and those that act on behalf of it. So i believe private for profit prisons can also have slaves because they are punishing criminals for the state so im not sure i would even say that the state has a monopoly on slavery its just that the state chooses the slaves via making and enforcing laws.
Punishment for committing a crime is not slavery. Indeed, community service is seen as preferable to jail time.
Indeed, potato potahto
Not many people are in prison for drug crimes, most of those who are are dealers, and prison labor's value is about $1 billion. The cost of law enforcement and corrections is roughly $400 billion. So it is worth about -$400 billion.
The belief you have comes from black nationalist propaganda which is promoted by Russia.
You heard what I said.
You are being manipulated.
Why are you defending mass incarceration?
The term "mass incarceration" is itself a propaganda term used to manipulate people.
IRL, the crime rate fell by about 50% when we locked up large numbers of criminals. As it turns out, in real life, rapists, murderers, robbers, burglars, etc. are horrible people who by and large will never change their ways. Average recidivism rates are often in excess of 80% in the long term.
Over half of people in prison are violent criminals. And we only catch about 60% of murderers; 40% escape. The rates for other crimes are worse.
So, yeah. We don't catch nearly enough criminals.
The US has by a large margin the highest official prison population rate in the entire friggin world, that's a cold hard fact. And you don't get to that position without a good dose of miscarriage of justice along the way, in many different forms.
That said I'm sure a better funded police force than many countries explains some of the discrepancy, as well as the numbers themselves being more reliable than those from less democratic countries.
The actual reason is almost entirely police efficacy combined with high homicide rate (homicide obviously has a very long sentence).
US police simply arrest a significantly higher percentage of people who commit property crimes and things like rapes.
Which if you know crime clearance rates in the US says depressing things about how few crimes get solved in Europe. We don't solve even 20% of many crimes. In Europe it is often in the single digits for property crimes.
Where I am not completely sure of your numbers because I have not researched them myself, I would say that it doesn't matter how much evidence you present. Your numbers could be 100% accurate, and people will not want to hear it, or they will find another study that refutes it. This is the era of disinformation and emotion. Logic has no place here, sadly.
the American population represents about 4% of the world population but our prisons hold 22% of the world prison population. Are you suggesting Americans are more criminal than other nations? The math doesn't work.
We arrest a higher percentage of criminals.
And that is sad because we catch less than half of violent criminals and less than 20% of those who commit property crimes.
By comparison only 7.8% of offenses reported in the UK were cleared.
So you agree non violent drug offenders shouldn't be in prison?
You mean the people financing the Mexican drug war leading to tens of thousands of deaths?
Let 'em rot.
SO??? These twats deserve to be behind bars...