Lance Sao Melendez-Heart

English 123
Professor Alzen
Fall 2016
Literature Review

Mandatory minimum sentencing was established in Connecticut in

1969 and then spread through the different states in the 1980s and 1990s.
Mandatory minimums refer to sentences for particular crimes that cannot be
revised by judges regardless of the fault or circumstances of the offender. For
most of the 19th and 20th centuries federal judges essentially had unlimited
sentencing discretion. In the 1960s and 1970s influential members of
congress criticized this practice, arguing that having unrestricted discretion
gave well-documented sentencing inequality in factually similar cases.
With the widespread increase in drug use from events in the 1960s
like Woodstock and soldiers returning home from Vietnam, who were now
addicted to heroin; President Nixon began a campaign to eradicate the use of
illicit drugs. This brought a large investment in treatment, rehabilitation, and
public health to fight against substance abuse. This effort became known as
the War on Drugs. According to Batey Mandatory Minimum Sentencing was
established as a strategy that came about to get tough on crime. He
argues that this strategy has failed because as a result of this law the
national prison population has quadrupled, and the drug problem is no better
than when this fight began. Batey argues that this law was thought to be

tough on pushers. The picture of a pusher was being a professional dealer

living off of the misery of the addicted. However this law not only applies to
professional dealers, but amateurs as well; such as children under the age of
18 years old recruited to sell illicit drugs.
This law is so broad that it sweeps in the minor criminals, as well as the
major ones. Unfortunately a major issue with this law is that kingpins do
not get the sentences they should receive because of substantial assistance
when prosecuting criminals. For example if a high level drug dealer is caught,
he may give details on others in his organization in order to get credit for
substantial assistance. This gives a lesser sentence for the kingpin and a
longer sentence for the lower-level associates. Batey argues that this takes a
toll on our society because mandatory minimum sentencing has filled our
prisons with the wrong people. More than two million which is more than 4
times what it was a few decades ago. This has also changed politics and race
relations by worsening the perceptions of racial and ethnical biases in the
United States.
This reform has been a goal of FAMM (Families Against Mandatory
Minimums) since it was founded in 1991. The organization motto is Let the
punishment fit the crime. They support the use of the guidelines to
influence the judges decision, but would like them to rely on discretion that
is appropriate for the sentence. The minimum sentencing abolishes the

discretion of the judges so FAMM proposes that the minimum sentencing

should be abolished.
Like Batey, Nesmith also argues that Mandatory minimums have
influenced society, the families of the offenders, and the offenders
themselves. There was a shift from rehabilitation and treatment, and an
emphasis was put on punitive retribution through mass incarceration, which
has taken a physiological toll on those that are incarcerated. Getting adapted
to prison life creates certain habits of thinking and acting that may be
difficult for inmates to adapt to post-prison. Inmates are required to
relinquish their freedoms and autonomies to make their own choices, which
leads to prisoners to have the inability to make their own choices and
decisions for themselves. This behavior may lead to the dependency on the
institution. This will have a negative effect on the inmates when reentering
society, because they may have lost the ability to provide appropriate
direction in their lives.
According to Nesmith there are other physiological effects on inmates
that effect their reentry back into society, which are hyper-vigilance,
interpersonal distrust, and emotional over-control which is a development of
social isolation and withdraw. Hyper vigilance occurs because of the constant
threat in the prison environment. There is a fear from the inmates that they
might be taken advantage of if any weakness is shown. Emotional overcontrol is often developed to hide and prevent any sign of weakness. The

biggest problem psychological toll these inmates face is reentry back into
the public. This may be the most prevalent for drug offenders serving long
terms as a result of long sentencings laws. The longer the sentence the more
likely the inmate will be dependent on the institution, which can hinder
decision making.
Both Nesmith and Batey agree that there is a need for congressional
action to remedy the policies of mandatory minimum sentencing in order to
correct the current problem that we have with mass incarceration. The main
problem that exists is the overly tough mandatory minimum sentencing and
the difficulty in reintegrating ex-prisoners into society-can only be addressed
by Congress. (Nesmith n83). To address this, the Smarter Sentencing Act
was introduced by Senator Dick Durbin and Mike Lee, which seeks to
modernize drug sentencing policies. This bill would cut the current
sentencing length in half as well as expanding exemptions for non-violent
offenders that have little or no criminal history. The bill was voted out, but
unfortunately this bill was has been prevented from moving forward.
Nesmith discusses a second bill that was introduced by Senator
Sheldon Whitehouse and John Cornyn. The Recidivism Reduction and Public
Safety Act seeks to reduce recidivism, increase public safety and reduce the
federal prison population. (Nesmith n87). This bill seeks to expand prison
jobs, drug treatment programs, and academic classes in order to prepare
inmates for life post-jail. The inmates are also able to earn early release

credits to the successful completion of these programs. This bill has been
voted out, however has been stalled in moving forward.
Mass incarceration can only be fixed with just, fair, and effective
sentencing systems according to Tonry (2014). First the three strikes rule
should be repealed and any three-strike law, mandatory sentencing, and
other comparable laws should be narrowed significantly. Tonry made several
proposals that can change the sentencing laws in the United States and if
adopted would significantly reduce the number of people in prison in the
future. However this adoption would not significantly reduce American
imprisonment in 2015 or in 2020. This would require execution of new laws
that reconsider sentencing that is currently in place.
These three sources all have a specific purpose that will help in arguing
against the mandatory minimum sentencing that is currently in place.
Eliminating or seriously revising the mandatory minimum sentencing laws
will help the United States reduce mass incarceration, and help cost and
benefits to the public, inmates and their families.
Works Cited
Batey, Robert. "Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: A Failed Policy." Phi Kappa
Phi Forum 82.1 (2002): 24. Academic Search Premier. Web. 28 Nov.
2016.

NESMITH, ROBERT C. "Tough On Crime Or Tough Luck For The Incarcerated?

Exploring The Adverse Psychological Impacts Of Mandatory Minimum
Sentencing And Pushing For Action." Law & Psychology Review 39.
(2015): 253-266. Academic Search Premier. Web. 28 Nov. 2016.
Tonry, Michael. "Remodeling American Sentencing: A Ten-Step Blueprint For
Moving Past Mass Incarceration." Criminology & Public Policy 13.4
(2014): 503-533. Academic Search Premier. Web. 29 Nov. 2016.