Posted on 09/23/2003 6:15:34 AM PDT by ZULU
Justice Criticizes Mandatory Sentencing By MARTIN FINUCANE Associated Press Writer
BOSTON (AP) - Mandatory minimum sentences are unfair and take away flexibility needed in the judicial process, said Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer.
"There has to be oil in the gears. ... There has to be room for the unusual or the exceptional case," he told about 550 people Sunday at the John F. Kennedy Library and Museum.
Breyer said Congress had passed a number of mandatory minimum statutes where "there is no room for flexibility on the downside."
"That is not a helpful thing to do," he said. "It's not going to advance the cause of law enforcement in my opinion and it's going to set back the cause of fairness in sentencing."
Last month, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy told the annual meeting of the American Bar Association that he favored scrapping the practice of setting mandatory minimum sentences for some federal crimes, saying that in all too many cases the sentences were unjust.
Breyer said that Kennedy, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, and "others on our court" shared his views on mandatory minimums.
The federal sentencing guidelines provide judges a range of possible punishments for most crimes. The system also allows judges to depart from the guidelines, imposing either tougher or more lenient sentences, in special cases.
Breyer said he hoped people on all sides of the criminal justice field would begin to see the harm caused by mandatory minimums and that Congress would eventually pass fewer of the sentences.
He said he was still optimistic about the guidelines because, "I think, while that monkey wrench has been thrown into the gears, it is not there permanently."
During the talk, which was moderated by National Public Radio's Nina Totenberg, Breyer also talked about Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court decision that essentially handed the election victory to President Bush.
He recalled telling a student at a talk after the decision was released that he was disappointed by the decision.
"I was very disappointed and I'm often disappointed," he said, pointing out that he was among the dissenters in a 5-4 decision, but saying he had hope he could sway the other justices to his views.
Asked by Totenberg for a comment on how that decision had affected the California recall vote, Breyer recalled a quote from the philosopher Wittgenstein.
"'Whereof you cannot speak there you must be silent' - that's my reaction to the California case," he said.
2003-09-22 09:38:50 GMT
Where the heck do these judges think they get off????
EVERYTHING is NOT a Constitutional issue. Mandatory sentencing is certainly not, and I think its a great idea. The crime rate is down, primarily because mandatory sentencing like Three Strikes and Your Out type laws have removed career criminals from the streets.
Once more liberal Supreme Court Justices demonstrate an inability to comprehend their Constitutional functions.
It's a shame that mandatory sentencing has to be enacted because judges LIKE BREYER won't do their jobs properly.
personally, I wouldn't have mandatory sentencing for non violent crime.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.