Jose J.

Barragan
POL-1 (38619)
American Politics
Charlotte Samuels
M 6-9:35pm
NJC Take Home Essay

In the reading portions slated for exam two, the New Jim Crow touched basis on
a covert scheme of racialized social regulation. Existent in our federal government that
functions in a manner strikingly like the Jim Crow laws of the south. Jim Crow is alive
and well, simply changed by the very government and Supreme Court that vowed to
destroy Jim Crow decades earlier; ex Loving v. Virginia, Heart of Atlanta Motel Inc. v.
United States, Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education. In the most recent
decades vindictive policies created in the 80s, 90s and 2000s have casually destroyed
the foundation of United States democracy.

When the Supreme Court constructed legal policies that would dictate how the
war on drugs was to be fought the court system upped the ante on racial discrimination.
Since those policies were enacted the Supreme Court has closed the courtroom to all
claims of racial bias at every stage of the criminal justice process. (Alexander, 2010,
P.138) Whren v. United States upheld that law enforcement agencies could use the
smallest traffic violations as an excuse to stop and search individuals for drugs/
paraphernalia. (Alexander, 2010, P.108) The Supreme Court ruled that these types of
actions did not violate the fourth amendment. It is no surprise that the court cases that
have most destroyed the Bill of Rights, are those centered on the fear of drugs; freedom
from unreasonable searches and seizures. On the law enforcement end of the spectrum
the war on drugs was an opportunity for police departments to cash in on the many
incentives provided by the federal government. Due to an increase in funding and other
incentives drug arrest rates soared. A great deal of money was given to police
departments along with special training, technical support and militarization capabilities
such as SWAT teams and equipment. (Alexander, 2010, P.73-75) Police departments
were also allowed to stay with the money and assets confiscated throughout the drug
war. (2000 Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act) Negatively there have been many
documented cases of police planting drugs and falsifying evidence to confiscate cash.

With an influx of people into the criminal justice system during the war on drugs,
legal misrepresentation was the greatest injustice to individuals. Without representation
people are not able to truly defend themselves. As a result, thousands of innocent
individuals were forced into mandatory sentences. Pleading guilty reduced the amount
of years an individual spent locked up behind bars. Even with Supreme Court cases
like, Gideon vs. Wainwright, all people were supposed to have the right to legal
representation including the poor. (Alexander, 2010, P.82-86) In many occasions those
caught up in justice system did not have access to attorneys or if they did, the attorneys
had such high caseloads that they did not simply have time for their clients. This adds to
the number of people that are imprisoned, which in turn caused minority Americans to
be criminalized even more.

By weakening the fourth amendment the Supreme Court allowed there to be

exceptions to the amendment when cops and others who are in the federal system have
decided to violate the search and seizure rules. For mass incarceration to continue, it is
crucial that the public have a very different picture of justice system regulations and
prisons than what is actually the reality.

Citations:

Alexander, M. (2010). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration In The Age of
Colorblindness. New York: New Press.

Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000, H.R.1658, 106th Congress. (1999)