Congress is still racist (big surprise, right?)

Jay Leiderman
By: Jay Leiderman
January 09 2015

Congress Violated the Equal Protection Clause and Exacerbated Racial Disparity When it Reaffirmed the Federal Sentencing Disparity for Powder to Crack Cocaine, Nation’s Criminal Defense Bar Tells Federal Appeals Court (“In an amicus curiae brief filed on December 18, 2014 in Davis v. United States Sentencing Commission, an appeal of a dismissal of a petition for writ of mandamus now pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) forcefully and methodically demonstrates that Congress’s 1995 reaffirmation of the 100:1 federal sentencing ratio for powder to crack cocaine violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution….Miller & Chevalier Member Timothy P. O’Toole authored NACDL’s amicus curiae brief in Davis. Mr. O’Toole serves as Vice Chair of NACDL’s White Collar Committee and formerly served on the Association’s Board of Directors. “When Congress acted to save the 100:1 ratio in 1995, it had before it overwhelming evidence that this ratio discriminated against African Americans and that there existed no rational justification for preserving it. It is hard to imagine a more textbook Equal Protection violation,” O’Toole said. NACDL President Theodore Simon said: ‘If we really want to deal with racial disparity in America’s criminal justice system, then we must address sentencing laws that significantly contribute to it. And while the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 reduced the discriminatory 100:1 ratio to a discriminatory 18:1 ratio, the arguments set forth in our brief seek to judicially correct a fundamentally unfair, discriminatory and unjust disparity that dramatically and unnecessarily increases the punishment imposed upon African Americans.'”)

8 thoughts on “Congress is still racist (big surprise, right?)

  1. Well, Dire Wolf 98, you are discussing REFORM, buuuuuut, we found out Friday that monsters are all about just REVOLUTION. This is globally (you go around the world) a spiritual thing. So, mine today is these continuances such as just described. Here, I am not GOING to put Congress in my next blog post bec. it is already in there. It is with drugs. Check your own selves. It comes out Jan 12. Ergo, “spiritual” is oftentimes “psychic”, and it is not willing to drop hose. Yeah, have you noticed Allah or any other prophets? What?

  2. “How to make Methamphetamine”. I’m not sure. It is “Congress’s Nuts”. The bone sits, I think. Thereafter, as am settle my head, say I’m too dumb. I’m a blond ewe’s housefly. You brave honor fight a jahine off you, with me. Ahhh! The towel-bond.

  3. Other site’s @sdmattpotter
    Is San Diego-imprisoned Sirhan Sirhan wasting time & money in appeals of RFK slaying conviction? via @sdreader.
    So it’s five hours ago. On Charlie Hebdon, nursing my notes up to the present time, I have the very words holding the very hands, like SATIRE BACK.
    On Matt Potter’s Reader magazine, it’s the start of the controversies over priority. ESP or France. We let shoes drop all over the internet. So long.
    Stephen E. Red Chemist I want rain.
    Seems like you would be in competition with only yourself on the account to think your thoughts. No, Maria thought one of mine. Now your stack of chips is down.

  4. Actual Realtime kinetic display showed LAPD covered up the shooting because there were 9 bullets and the gun only held 5. They love to say who shot Robert Kennedy.

  5. It’s actually a great and useful piece of info. I am glad that you shared this
    helpful information with us. Please stay us
    informed like this. Thanks for sharing.

  6. But the family share something on social media, we likely share it with our entire web. That might be 50 people, obviously 1,000 people, but it takes merely one person to copy and paste and spread it somewhere more. Furthermore, even if we privately send a message through Facebook, we don’t have an way of verifying in the event that profile picture and name is actually the person on the other side. We have much cheaper than control.

Comments are closed.