The Illusion of Justice
Many people immigrate to the United States seeking new opportunities and a better lives as a citizen. Everyday citizens never think to question the validity of the pledge of allegiance, in particular the section that states "For liberty and justice for all". Does the United States government abide by this pledge and give every citizen, including the lawbreakers, justice? In my opinion, I do not believe that every citizen is given a fair trial under the current drug laws created by the government, which results in a higher rate of unreasonable prison sentencing. A former member of the U.S. House Committee rebukes the drug laws enacted in 1986 under the leadership of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Tip O 'Neil. He used the publicized death by overdose of Len Bias, the Boston Celtics Pick, to call for the nation to take a tougher stance against drug trafficking. Tip O 'Neil demanded the creation of a new drug bill in four weeks. This rushed deadline allowed mistakes to happen. This drug bill was created to give the justice department the power to deliver mandatory minimum sentences to high-level drug traffickers. In reality, only 10 percent of federal drug cases involve high-level traffickers. Former House Committee member Eric Sterling divulged that DEA agents and assistant attorneys are misusing this statue, with the complicity of their managers in the Department of Justice, to engage in what now has really become a pattern and
In the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, drug use became a major concern for most Americans. As the War on Drugs and “Just Say No” campaign were being thrust into the spotlight by the government and media, the public became more aware of the scope of drug use and abuse in this country. The federal and states’ governments quickly responded by creating and implementing more harsh and punitive punishments for drug offenses. Most of these laws have either remained unchanged or become stricter in the years since then.
In The Republic, the great philosopher Plato attempts to reveal through the character and dialogues of Socrates that justice is better when it is the good for which men must strive for, regardless of whether they could be unjust and still be rewarded. His method is to use dialectic, the asking and answering of questions. This method leads the audience from one point to another, supposedly with indisputable logic by obtaining agreement to each point before going on to the next, therefore, building an argument.
Nixon’s declaration had pushed law makers and politicians across the states to implement more punitive drug laws. Prior to the Nixon’s declaration, New York’s governor Nelson Rockefeller “had backed drug rehabilitation, job training and housing” to combat the city’s drug problems (Mann, Brian. “The Drug Laws That Changed How We Punish”. NPR.). After Nixon declared a national war on drugs however, Rockefeller’s political views shifted. According to Joseph Persico, Rockefeller’s closest aid, Rockefeller turned to Persico and said, “For drug pushing, life sentence, no parole, no probation”. When Rockefeller Launched his campaign, he called for a
“The Smarter Sentencing Act (S. 502/H.R. 920) is a bipartisan bill sponsored by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Mike Lee (R-UT) in the U.S. Senate and Representatives Raul Labrador (R-ID) and Bobby Scott (D-VA) in the U.S. House of Representatives. The bill does not repeal any federal mandatory minimum sentences, but instead reduces prison costs and populations by creating fairer, less costly minimum terms for nonviolent drug offenders.”
In what ways is the indigenous justice paradigm in conflict with the principles of the traditional, adversarial American criminal justice system? In what ways do the principles of Native American justice complement more mainstream correctional initiatives?
Summary: This bill would increase use of the “drug trafficking safety valve” which allows certain exceptions to mandatory minimum laws for defendants who meet certain criteria and would institute “release valves” for low-risk, old or dying offenders. It directs the use of mandatory minimums and sentence enhancements only in cases with “higher-level traffickers” and would reduce life sentences for some drug offenders with repeated offenses to 25 years. This bill also enhances the ability of defendants to earn time off their sentence through good behavior and requires the government to issue “fiscal impact statements for sentencing bills” and share sentencing costs in “pre-sentencing reports.” The bill would hand the power to prosecute simple possession charges back the states. The goal of the legislation is to curb over-criminalization, expand sentencing alternatives through the creation of drug and mental health courts and return of probation, save imprisonment for those with a career of violent offenses, reduce the likelihood of re-offending, and bring accountability and openness to the system. This bill would also allow for retroactive resentencing under the new
This bipartisan legislation combats the opioid epidemic by establishing a streamlined, comprehensive opioid abuse grant program, including vital training and resources for first responders and law enforcement, criminal investigations for the unlawful distribution of opioids, drug and other alternative treatment courts, and residential substance abuse treatment. This legislation is just the first of many steps that Congress has taken to combat the opioid epidemic. Additionally, The United States Congress has also taken action in order to reduce the number of folks who actively traffic in opioids. During the 114th Congress, the transnational Drug Trafficking Act of 2015 was signed into law. This legislation allows federal law enforcement to go after, not the lowly drug mules moving drugs into the United States, but the criminals who facilitate at a high level, within the source nation, the trafficking of narcotics and precursor chemicals into the United
“The court finds you guilty on all accounts. You are sentenced to 35 years in federal prison. Court dismissed.” If only justice in America was the same as a hollywood movie, where, in the end, each and every person put on trial receives a true and just verdict. It would be nice if America’s justice system was designed so that “you couldn’t be the next victim of corruption - innocent and sent to prison, or strapped to a table and put to death; or robbed of your life savings by American lawyers” (Sachs, America’s Corrupt Legal). Welcome to the new America, where all it takes is pockets as deep as the Pacific Ocean to be innocent and poverty to be found guilty, thrown in jail, and not given a second thought. Although America often prides itself on its just ways of governing and dealing with potential criminals, the justice system is often corrupted because of social issues, ethical issues, corrupt officials, and control of the press.
Throughout years in the criminal justice system, women being incarcerated has increased drastically. Since the amount of women offenders increased above male offenders, equality is sought out. There is an expand amount of gender disparities in federal cases. With women seeking equality through justice over the decades, changes should be made within the justice system to provide impartiality, acknowledge the gender difference and it’s importance.
The phenomenon of culling spikes on high fence ranches has been researched intensively for the past fifty years with good arguments on both sides. However, culling spikes may be a little too extreme since they can become a marketable animal in the future. Allowing them to mature is essential to see what they can be before considering them a cull. Culling spikes in certain areas can potentially decrease the density of a herd in arid environments where fawn crops are erratic. Nutrition of the doe is equally important as the buck in improving herd genetic quality. Therefore, the culling of spikes is not necessary to improve the genetic quality of a herd, but to give the spike an extra year of development to allow him to catch up with his genetic
I am a faithful, dedicated, and responsible delegate who tries to separate himself from all possible bias. I am mature in my actions and attitude. You might see me participating by listening or just sitting silently but don't let my shy persona dissuade you. I seek to bring justice to EBS and will do so fairly one civil or criminal case at a time. I'm no Batman, but when it comes down to serving justice, I'll be your next best bet. Make sure constitutional justice is guaranteed here at evergreen and vote for
The term justice is used in some of America's most treasured and valued documents, from the Pledge of Allegiance, to the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence. Everyone wants to be treated justly whether it's in the courtroom or the local bar. Most people would feel confident giving a definition for justice, but would it be a definition we could universally agree to? Given that justice is a very common term, and something we all want, it's important to have a precise definition. For hundreds of years philosophers have argued, debated, and fought over this topic. Justice can clearly be defined as the intention to conform to truth and fairness. This is true justice.
The criminal justice system views any crime as a crime committed against the state and places much emphasis on retribution and paying back to the community, through time, fines or community work. Historically punishment has been a very public affair, which was once a key aspect of the punishment process, through the use of the stocks, dunking chair, pillory, and hangman’s noose, although in today’s society punishment has become a lot more private (Newburn, 2007). However it has been argued that although the debt against the state has been paid, the victim of the crime has been left with no legal input to seek adequate retribution from the offender, leaving the victim perhaps feeling unsatisfied with the criminal justice process.
In Book I of the Republic, Plato examines whether injustice is more profitable than justice. Thrasymachus claims that statement to be true so Socrates sets out to show that justice is stronger and more powerful than injustice. Also, that a just person is happy while an unjust person is unhappy. Socrates establishes right before with Thrasymachus that injustice is wisdom and virtue while injustice is ignorance. From this, Socrates believes it will be easily shown that justice is stronger. In this paper, I will begin by examining Socrates’ weaker argument that says a just person is happy. Here, he claims that the virtue of a soul is justice, and the soul has multiple functions that can only be performed well through justice. However, this
Over the decades, the concept of justice has been continually evolving. This is occurring based upon different moral or legal interpretations. Evidence of this can be seen with observations from Burke (2011) who said, "Few things are of more importance to a society than its concept of justice. This is because it is justice that provides criterion for the legitimate use of force. In the name of justice people are detained, arrested, handcuffed, put on trial and punished. This concept is used to provide every society with some kind of social order. Over the last 200 years, a revolution has taken place with these principles. Our idea of it is what we employ, when dealing with ordinary individuals in daily life including: making agreements, paying bills, resolving disputes and putting criminals in jail. This is a concept that is as old as recorded history and it is familiar to people everywhere. What makes it so unique is that these ideas are constantly changing which focuses on society as a whole and how people are interacting with each other. " (Burke)