October, 12 2016, 12:00am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tess Borden, ACLU and Human Rights Watch, tborden@aclu.org
Maria McFarland Sanchez-Moreno, Human Rights Watch, mcfarlm@hrw.org
Alexandra Ringe, ACLU, aringe@aclu.org
New Report: Disastrous Toll of Drug Use Criminalization
Enforcement Destroys Families, Undermines Health
WASHINGTON
The massive enforcement of laws criminalizing personal drug use and possession in the United States causes devastating harm, Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said in a joint report released today. Enforcement ruins individual and family lives, discriminates against people of color, and undermines public health. The federal and state governments should decriminalize the personal use and possession of illicit drugs.
The 196-page report, "Every 25 Seconds: The Human Toll of Criminalizing Drug Use in the United States," finds that enforcement of drug possession laws causes extensive and unjustifiable harm to individuals and communities across the country. The long-term consequences can separate families; exclude people from job opportunities, welfare assistance, public housing, and voting; and expose them to discrimination and stigma for a lifetime. While more people are arrested for simple drug possession in the U.S. than for any other crime, mainstream discussions of criminal justice reform rarely question whether drug use should be criminalized at all.
"Every 25 seconds someone is funneled into the criminal justice system, accused of nothing more than possessing drugs for personal use," said Tess Borden, Aryeh Neier Fellow at Human Rights Watch and the ACLU and the report's author. "These wide-scale arrests have destroyed countless lives while doing nothing to help people who struggle with dependence."
The organizations interviewed 149 people prosecuted for using drugs in Louisiana, Texas, Florida, and New York -- 64 of whom were in custody -- and 217 other individuals, including family members of those prosecuted, current and former government officials, defense attorneys, service providers, and activists. The organizations also did extensive new analysis of data obtained from Texas, Florida, New York, and the FBI.
Among those interviewed was "Neal," whose name, like that of some others, was changed to protect his privacy. "Neal" has a rare autoimmune disease and is serving five years in a Louisiana prison for possessing less than 0.2 grams of crack cocaine. He said he cried the day he pled guilty because he knew he might not survive his sentence.
Another is Corey, serving 17 years in Louisiana for possessing half an ounce of marijuana. His 4-year-old daughter Charlee, who has never seen him outside prison, thinks she visits him at work. A third is "Nicole," who after being held pretrial for months in a Houston jail, separated from her three young children, finally pled guilty to her first felony. The conviction, for possessing heroin residue in an empty baggie, meant she would lose her student financial aid, job opportunities, and the food stamps she had relied on to feed her children.
"Do they realize what they are doing to people's lives in here?" said "Matthew," from the Hood County jail in Texas. "Because of my drug addiction, they just keep punishing me... They never offered me no help. I have been to prison five times, and it's destroyed me."
"Matthew" was sentenced to 15 years for possession of an amount of methamphetamines so small the laboratory could not even weigh it. The lab result simply read "trace." His prior convictions were mostly out-of-state and related to his drug dependence.
"While families, friends, and neighbors understandably want government to take action to prevent the potential harm caused by drug use, criminalization is not the answer," Borden said. "Locking people up for using drugs causes tremendous harm, while doing nothing to help those who need and want treatment."
Four decades after President Richard Nixon declared a "war on drugs," rates of use have not significantly declined. People who need treatment often find it is unavailable, and criminalization tends to drive people who use drugs underground, making it less likely that they will get care and more likely that they will engage in unsafe practices that make them vulnerable to disease and overdoses.
All states and the federal government criminalize possession of illicit drugs for personal use. The majority of states make possession of small amounts of commonly used drugs such as cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamines a felony. Each year, the organizations found, state law enforcement agencies make more than 1.25 million drug possession arrests -- one of every nine arrests nationwide.
Despite officials' claims that drug laws are primarily used to combat drug distribution, four times as many people are arrested for possessing drugs as for selling them. Half of those arrested for possession are charged with nothing more serious than possessing marijuana for personal use. In 2015, according to data analyzed by the groups, police made 14 percent more arrests for simple marijuana possession than for all violent crimes combined.
Black people use drugs at similar or even lower rates than white people, yet data the groups analyzed shows that Black adults are more than two-and-a-half times more likely to be arrested for drug possession, and nearly four times more likely to be arrested for simple marijuana possession. In many states, the racial disparities were even higher - 6 to 1 in Montana, Iowa, and Vermont. In Manhattan, Black people are nearly 11 times as likely as white people to be arrested for drug possession.
This racially disparate enforcement amounts to racial discrimination under international human rights law, said Human Rights Watch and the ACLU. Because the FBI and US Census Bureau do not collect race data for Latinos, it was impossible to determine disparities for that population, the groups found.
On any given day, at least 137,000 men and women are behind bars for drug possession. Tens of thousands more are convicted, cycle through jails and prisons, and spend extended periods on probation and parole, often burdened with crippling debt from court-imposed fines and fees.
People interviewed for the report were prosecuted for small quantities of drugs -- sometimes fractions of a gram -- that were clearly for personal use. The report's analysis of new data suggests that in 2015, nearly 16,000 people in Texas were sentenced to jail or prison for possession of under one gram of substances containing commonly used drugs -- enough for only a handful of doses in many cases.
State legislatures and Congress should decriminalize personal use and possession of all drugs, Human Rights Watch and the ACLU said. Federal and state governments should invest resources in programs to decrease the risks associated with drug use and provide and support voluntary treatment options for people struggling with drug dependence, along with other approaches.
Until full decriminalization is achieved, officials at all levels of government should minimize and mitigate the harmful consequences of current laws and practices. The groups provided detailed recommendations to state legislatures, police, prosecutors, and other state and local government entities, as well as the federal government.
"Criminalizing personal drug use is a colossal waste of lives and resources," Borden said. "If governments are serious about addressing problematic drug use, they need to end the current revolving door of drug possession arrests, and focus on effective health strategies instead."
"Every 25 Seconds: The Human Toll of Criminalizing Drug Use in the United States" is available at:
https://www.hrw.org/node/294820/
Video:
https://media.hrw.org/index.asp?ID=EBMUE<=ENG&showEmbargoed=true
For more Human Rights Watch reporting on the United States, please visit:
https://www.hrw.org/united-states
For more Human Rights Watch reporting on criminal justice, please visit:
https://www.hrw.org/united-states/criminal-justice
For more ACLU reporting on criminal justice, please visit:
https://www.aclu.org/issues/mass-incarceration
The following are quotes from people interviewed for the report, with all names changed to protect their privacy.
"When you're a low-income person of color using drugs, you're criminalized -- that means demonized, marginalized, stigmatized.... When we're locked up, we're not only locked in but also locked out. Locked out of housing.... Locked out of employment and other services. Locked into a class that's underclass -- you're a fixed class; you're not a person anymore, because you had a drug."
-- Cameron Barnes, New York City, arrested repeatedly for drug possession by New York City police from the 1980s until 2012
"You get thrown in here. You don't have any contact with the outside world. I'm waiting on everybody else. Everything is crumbling."
-- Breanna Wheeler, speaking from jail in Galveston, Texas, where she was detained pretrial for methamphetamine residue in a baggie. A single mother, she eventually pled to her first felony conviction and time served so she could return home to her nine-year-old daughter
"I've been in here for four months, and [my job] was the only income for my family.... [Their] water has been cut off since I've been in here. The lights were cut off.... Basically that's what happens when people come here. It doesn't just affect us, but it affects everyone around us."
-- Allen Searle, speaking from jail in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, where he had been detained pretrial for almost a hundred days
"You're starting life over. You can't expect to be absent from society and just walk back in. You've lost everything - your job, apartment, whatever you had before you're going to lose that.... Because I caught this felony, I was on the street for five years. I had never been homeless before.... [Y]ou walk out of those [prison] gates and you're on your own."
-- Charlie West, a former U.S. military medic, describing his reentry after incarceration for felony possession of cocaine in New York City in 2010
"I don't see why [the felony record is] defining. It's not like we're a minority; they're making us a majority. If a matter comes up that is important to me, I can't vote and make a difference in the world.... You don't realize -- the vote -- how important that stuff is until you lose it. I was convicted at 18; I had never been able to vote yet.... I found my voter registration card. I thought, here's a good high school memory of when me and my friend got registration cards. Now I can't use it. I just threw it out."
-- Trisha Richardson in Auburndale, Florida, one of three states to impose lifetime disenfranchisement, convicted of possession of Xanax and methamphetamines
"The felony conviction is going to ruin my life.... I'll pay for it for[ever]. Because of my record, I don't know how or where I'll start rebuilding my life: school, job, government benefits are now all off the table for me. Besides the punishment even [of prison].... It's my whole future."
-- Nicole Bishop, speaking from the Harris County Jail, where she was detained pretrial for heroin residue in a baggie and cocaine residue inside a plastic straw
"Food stamps, you can't get them for a year. So you go dig in a dumpster. My food stamps are for my kids, not me."
-- Melissa Wright, on probation in drug court after pleading guilty in Covington, Louisiana
"Trace cases need to be reevaluated. If you're being charged with a .01 for a controlled substance, ... that's an empty baggie, that's an empty pipe. There used to be something in it. They are ruining people's lives over it."
-- Alyssa Burns, speaking from the Harris County Jail, where she was detained pretrial for methamphetamine residue inside a pipe
"I remember when they said I was guilty in the courtroom, the wind was knocked out of me. I went, 'the rest of my life?' ... All I could think about is that I could never do anything enjoyable in my life again. Never like be in love with someone and be alone with them... never be able to use a cell phone...take a shower in private, use the bathroom in private.... There's 60 people in my cell, and only one of us has gone to trial. They are afraid to be in my situation."
-- Jennifer Edwards, speaking from jail in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, about the jury's guilty verdict. Because of her prior drug possession convictions, she faced a minimum of 20 years to life in prison for possessing a small amount of heroin
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666LATEST NEWS
Supreme Court Urged to 'Rule Quickly' After Trump Immunity Arguments
"It'd be a travesty for justices to delay matters further," said one legal expert.
Apr 25, 2024
After about three hours of oral arguments Thursday on former President Donald Trump's immunity claims, legal experts and democracy defenders urged the U.S. Supreme Court to rule swiftly, with just over six months until the November election.
Trump—the presumptive Republican candidate to challenge Democratic President Joe Biden, despite his 88 felony charges in four ongoing criminal cases—is arguing that presidential immunity should protect him from federal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 loss to Biden, which culminated in the January 6, 2021 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Justices across the ideological spectrum didn't seem inclined to support Trump's broad immunity claims—which critics have said "reflect a misreading of constitutional text and history as well as this court's precedent." However, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) shared examples of what it would mean if they did.
"Trump could sell pardons, ambassadorships, and other official benefits to his wealthy donors, members of his clubs, or cronies who helped him commit other crimes," CREW warned. "Trump could sell nuclear codes and government secrets to help pay back crippling debts."
"But this isn't just about what Donald Trump could do. It's really about how total immunity for the president would threaten our democratic system of checks and balances," the group continued. "The president could order the military to assassinate activists, political opponents, members of Congress, or even Supreme Court justices, so long as he claimed it related to some official act."
After warning that a president could also order the occupation or closure of the Capitol or high court to prevent actions against him, CREW concluded that "the Supreme Court never should have taken this appeal up in the first place. They should rule quickly and shut these ludicrous claims down for good."
The organization was far from alone in demanding a quick decision from the nation's highest court.
"In the name of accountability, the court must not delay its decision," the Brennan Center for Justice said Thursday evening. "The Supreme Court's time is up. It needs to let the prosecution move forward. The court decided Bush v. Gore in three days—it should act with similar alacrity in deciding Trump v. U.S."
In Bush v. Gore, the case that decided the 2000 election, the high court issued a related stay on December 9, heard oral arguments on December 11, and issued a final decision on December 12.
On Thursday, the arguments "got away from the central question: Is a former president immune from criminal prosecution if he tried to overthrow a presidential election, using private means and the power of his office to do so?" the Brennan Center noted. "The answer is simple: No."
"It is not an 'official act' to try to overthrow the peaceful transfer of power or the Constitution, even if you conspire with other government officials to do it or use the Oval Office phone," the center said. "Trump's attorney was pushing the court to come up with a sea change in the law. That's unnecessary and a delay tactic that will hurt the pursuit of justice in this case."
In a departure from previous claims, Trump's attorney, D. John Sauer, "appeared to agree with Special Counsel Jack Smith, who is leading the prosecution, that there are some allegations in the indictment that do not involve 'official acts' of the president," NBC Newsreported, noting questions from liberal Justice Elena Kagan and conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee.
Barrett summarized various allegations from the indictment and in three cases—involving dishonest election claims, false allegations of fraud, and fake electors—Sauer conceded that Trump's alleged conduct sounded private, suggesting that a more narrow case against the ex-president that excluded any potential official acts could proceed.
Due to Trump attorney's concessions in Supreme Court oral argument, there's now a very clear path for DOJ's case to go forward.\n\nIt'd be a travesty for Justices to delay matters further.\n\nJustice Amy Coney Barrett got Trump attorney to concede core allegations are private acts.\u2b07\ufe0f— (@)
According to NBC:
Matthew Seligman, a lawyer and a fellow at the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford Law School who filed a brief backing prosecutors, said Sauer's concessions highlight that Trump is "not immune for the vast majority of the conduct alleged in the indictment."
Ultimately, he said, the case will go to trial "absent some external intervention—like Trump ordering [the Justice Department] to drop the charges" after having won the election.
At the same time, Sauer's backtracking might have little consequence from an electoral perspective. Further delay in a trial, which Sauer is close to achieving, is a form of victory in itself.
Slate's Mark Joseph Stern pointed out that when Barrett similarly questioned Michael Dreeben, the U.S. Department of Justice lawyer arguing the case for Smith, it seemed like they "were trying to work out some compromise wherein the trial court could distinguish between official and unofficial acts, then instruct the jury not to impose criminal liability on the former."
"It was fascinating to watch Barrett nodding along as Dreeben pitched a compromise that would largely preserve Smith's January 6 prosecution but limit what the jury could hear, or at least consider," Stern added. "That, though, would take months to suss out in the trial court. More delays!"
Stern and other experts signaled that the decision likely comes down to Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts, with the three liberals seemingly supporting the prosecution of Trump and the other four conservatives suggesting it is unconstitutional.
People for the American Way president Svante Myrick said in a statement that "today's argument brought both good and bad news. It was chilling to hear Donald Trump's lawyer say that staging a military coup could be considered part of a president's official duties."
"Thankfully, the majority of the court, including conservative justices, did not seem to buy that very broad Trump argument that a former president is absolutely immune from prosecution under any circumstances," Myrick added. "On the other hand, it's not clear that there is a majority on this court that will quickly reject the immunity arguments and let the case go forward in time for a trial before the election. That's a huge concern."
Trump was not at the Supreme Court on Thursday; he was at his trial in New York, where he faces 34 counts for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments to cover up sex scandals during the 2016 election cycle. The are two other cases: a federal one for mishandling classified material and another in Georgia for interfering with the last presidential contest.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Just the Beginning': 50+ Arrested for Blockading Citigroup Bank Over Climate Crimes
"Through people-powered resistance, we can give money a conscience and stop Citi's destruction of our planet," said one Indigenous campaigner.
Apr 25, 2024
Twenty more demonstrators were arrested Thursday, the second day of Earth Week protests targeting Citigroup's Manhattan headquarters in what organizers called "the beginning of a wave of direct actions to take place over the summer targeting big banks for creating climate chaos that is killing our communities and our planet."
Protest organizers—who include Climate Defenders, New York Communities for Change, Planet over Profit, and Stop the Money Pipeline—said 53 activists were arrested over two days of demonstrations, which included blocking the entrance to Citigroup's headquarters, to "demand that the bank stop funding fossil fuels."
Organizers said this week's demonstrations "were just the beginning" of what they're calling a "Summer of Heat" targeting big banks for their role in the climate emergency and for "polluting our land, air, and water, and threatening the health of children, families, and our planet." Citigroup is the world's second-largest fossil fuel financier.
"We're holding Citi accountable for financing dirty fossil fuels from Canada to Latin America and beyond," said Chief Na'moks of the Wet'suwet'en Nation, one of several Indigenous leaders who took part in the action. "Through people-powered resistance, we can give money a conscience and stop Citi's destruction of our planet."
Jonathan Westin, executive director of Climate Defenders, asserted that "Citigroup's racist funding of oil, coal, and gas is creating climate chaos that's devastating communities of color across the country."
"We're taking action to tell Citi that we won't put up with their environmental racism for one more day," Westin continued. "Our communities have reached the boiling point. Our children have asthma, our city's sky was orange, and our air polluted because of the climate crisis caused by Citi and Wall Street."
"We're going to keep organizing and taking direct action until Citi listens to us," he vowed.
Stop the Money Pipeline co-director Alec Connon said: "To have any chance of reigning in the climate crisis, we must stop investing in fossil fuel expansion. Yet, Citibank is pumping billions of dollars into new coal, oil, and gas projects."
"We're here to make it clear: If they're going to fund the companies disrupting our climate and our lives, we're going to disrupt their business," Connon added.
Activists have repeatedly targeted Citigroup in recent years as the megabank has pumped more than $300 billion into fossil fuel investments around the world since the Paris climate agreement.
According to the protest organizers:
Citi has provided $668 million in funding to Formosa Plastics between 2001-2021, which is trying to build a $9.4 billion plastics facility in a majority Black community in the heart of Cancer Alley in Louisiana.
Citigroup is also one of the biggest funders of state-run oil and gas companies in the Amazon basin, pumping in over $40 billion between 2016-2020, and a major backer of Petroperú, which has been involved in oil spills and Indigenous rights violations.
"From wildfires, heatwaves, and floods to deadly air pollution and mass drought, Citi's fossil fuel financing is killing us," said Alice Hu of New York Communities for Change. "We've sent polite petitions and had pleading meetings with bank representatives, but Citi refuses to stop pouring billions each year into coal, oil, and gas."
"That's why we're fighting for our lives now with the best tool we have left: mass, nonviolent disruptive civil disobedience," Hu added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
No Outside Probe, US Reiterates as Gazans Reportedly Buried Alive in Mass Grave
"How does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself?" asked one incredulous reporter.
Apr 25, 2024
A Biden administration spokesperson once again brushed off calls for an independent investigation into how hundreds of Palestinians found in mass graves near Gaza hospitals died when asked Thursday about new reports that many of the victims were tortured, summarily executed—and in some cases, buried alive by Israeli invaders.
During a Thursday U.S. State Department press conference in Washington, D.C., a reporter noted Gaza officials' claim that mass grave victims "including children were tortured before being killed" and that "some even showed signs of being buried alive, along with other crimes against humanity."
"What's wrong with an independent, scientific, forensic investigation?"
Noting calls by Palestinian officials and United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk for an independent probe into mass graves, the reporter said that "this administration repeatedly said that it asks... the Israeli government to investigate itself."
"How does it ever make sense that the United States asks the accused party to examine itself and provide reports that you have previously said that you actually trust?" the reporter asked State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Vedant Patel. "What's wrong with an independent, scientific, forensic investigation?"
Patel replied: "We continue to find these reports incredibly troubling. And that's why yesterday you saw the national security adviser for this to be thoroughly investigated."
While National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan on Wednesday called reports of mass grave atrocities "deeply disturbing" and said that "we want answers" from Israel, he did not call for an independent investigation.
When the reporter pressed Patel on the legitimacy of asking Israel to investigate itself, Patel said, "we believe that through a thorough investigation we can get some additional answers."
Thursday's exchange followed a similar back-and-forth on Tuesday between Patel and Said Arikat, a journalist for the Jerusalem-based
Palestinian news outlet al-Quds who asked about the mass graves.
At least 392 bodies—including numerous women and children—have been found in mass graves outside Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, southern Gaza, where Palestinian Civil Defense and other workers have been exhuming victims for nearly a week. Officials believe there are as many as 700 bodies in three separate mass graves.
Based on more recent exhumations, local Civil Defense chief Yamen Abu Sulaiman said during a Wednesday press conference that "we believe that the occupation buried alive at least 20 people at the Nasser Medical Complex."
"There are cases of field execution of some patients while undergoing surgeries and wearing surgical gowns," he stated, adding that some victims showed signs of torture and 10 bodies had medical tubes attached to them.
Gaza Civil Defense official Mohammed Mughier told reporters that "we need forensic examination" to definitively determine the causes of death for the 20 people believed to have been buried alive.
Previous reporting on the mass graves quoted rescue workers who said they found people who were apparently executed while their hands were bound, with some victims missing heads, skin, and internal organs.
Other mass graves have been found in Gaza, most notably on the grounds of al-Shifa Hospital, where Israeli forces last month committed what the Geneva-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor called "one of the largest massacres in Palestinian history."
It's also not the first time there have been reports of Israeli troops burying victims alive during the current war, in which Palestinian and international officials say Israeli forces have killed or wounded more than 122,000 Gazans, including at least 11,000 people who are missing and feared dead. Israeli forces attacking Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahia last December reportedly bulldozed and buried alive dozens of injured patients and displaced people.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular