home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: kkruse@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Korey J. Kruse)
- Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
- Subject: NY Times article....Judges to refuse drug cases
- Date: 19 Apr 1993 02:28:32 -0500
- Message-ID: <1qtkb0INNo6l@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>
-
- Here's a copy of a New York Times article that appeared Sunday, April 18
- 1993. Although basically nothings really improved, at least some
- people with influence (and age) are getting smart. 50 out of 680
- judges are refusing to try drug cases in the federal courts, a
- surprisingly large percentage in my opinion. Hopefully, we'll be
- seeing more famous people, politicians, judges, and other people
- involved with criminal justice start to make their anti-WoD opinions
- public.
- Seems like good news to me. Anyone else have any comments on the
- articles ?
-
- ------article begins here----------
-
- Judges to refuse drug cases, citing bad sentencing rules.
-
- NEW YORK -- Two federal judges in New York say they will not
- preside over drug cases, joining dozens of other jurists who oppose
- U.S. drug-sentencing policies.
- The decisions by U.S. District Judges Jack B. Weinstein of
- Brooklyn and Whitman Knapp of Manhattan were made in protest Friday
- against national drug policies and federal sentencing guidelines.
- The judges said the emphasis on arrests and imprisonment, rather
- than prevention and treatment, has been a failure, and they are with-
- drawing from the effort.
- Federal court officials estimated that about 50 of the 680 federal
- judges are refusing to take drug cases. The protest has been confined
- to senior judges, a catagory of judges eligible for retirement who are
- given wide latitude in choosing their cases.
- The two judges, who have not criticized drug policies in the past,
- said that on special request they would preside over a drug case to help
- an overloaded colleague. But they said they would insist that sentences
- be delivered by others.
- A few federal judges have called for the legalization of drugs, and
- a few have resigned rather than apply what they regarded as overly
- harsh sentences.
- "The present policy of trying to prohibit drugs through the use of
- criminal law is a mistake," said Robert W. Sweet, a federal judge in
- Manhattan who began speaking in favor of legalization of drugs four years
- ago. "It's a policy that's not working. It's not cutting down drug use.
- The best way to do this is through education and treatment."
- Knapp and Weinstein said they were not calling for legalization of
- drugs, nor did they offer any specific solutions to the drug problem.
- Their decisions are expected to have little effect on the flow of
- cases through the federal courts except to increase the burden on other
- judges.
- But a top federal admministrative judge said the actions would
- probably have a symbolic effect and encourage other judges to speak out
- against policies that many judges oppose.
- "A lot of judges feel the present system breeds injustice," said
- U.S. District Judge William W. Schwarzer, the director of the Federal
- Judicial Center, the educational and research agaency in Washington for
- the federal courts.
- He said many judges think sentencing rules enacted by Congress that
- provide for little or nor judical discretion "load up the prisons but
- have not done much else to improve the drug situation."
-
-
-
-
-
- --
- _ _ _ _ _ _ kkruse@ksuvm.bitnet
- |/ | | |_) |_ \ / | |/ |_) | | (_` |_ kkruse@ksuvm.ksu.edu
- |\ |_| | \ |_ | (_| |\ | \ |_| ._) |_ kkruse@matt.ksu.edu
-
-
-