For years the US government has facilitated the violation of constitutional law by supporting state "rights" to illegally seize the assets of criminal suspects who have not been convicted of a crime. Under these unconstitutional practices, local and state authorities seized assets of suspected criminals using federal adoptive forfeiture practices. In 2015 Attorney General Eric Holder, who recognized the constitutional violation of such practices, put a stop to it. A March 2017 Justice Department report found that in the eight years prior to Holder stopping the practice, its use led to forced forfeiture of about $880 million in assets. These assets were unlawfully taken from suspected criminal defendants, not convicted ones.
While constitutional law advocates applauded Holder's reversal of this unconstitutional practice, within the first 100-day legacy of the Trump administration the new Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed Holder's decision and re-sanctioned law enforcement to continue their constitutionally invalid search and seizure practices.
Tough on crime advocates may applaud this Trump administration decision because it means additional funds for state and federal law enforcement agencies, but those who are quick to applaud such measures ought to reconsider their position. This illegal search and seizure practice is not against convicted criminals, but against those who are suspected of committing a crime. A core American principle is the protection of its citizens against government overreach through Constitutional Amendments like the 4th Amendment against unreasonable search and seizure. When we allow local, state, and federal authorities the autonomy to take the assets of its citizens without due process, we afford our government too much authority.
When its Constitution no longer protects citizens who have not been convicted of a crime, America ought to be gravely concerned. This unlawful practice also ought to alarm America's citizens and alert them to the reality that when its citizens do not hold them accountable, government authority is often misused and abused. If the American government abuses the constitutional protections of its law-abiding citizens, it is no small jump to conclude that many of the constitutional violations claimed against state and federal law enforcement and court systems by citizens who have been convicted of crimes (often because of those violations) are founded in truth. Americans must stand up and demand integrity from their government. Failing to do so may mean that you, law abiding or not, may be the next citizen to find himself or herself railroaded by a government who operates outside the law.
Sunday, September 24, 2017
Thursday, September 14, 2017
Equal Protection of the Law...for Some
One of the principles of justice the early American fathers considered important enough to write into the Constitution is that of equal justice for all. The Fourteenth Amendment, passed into law in 1868, recognized the unequal and inconsistent application of justice, particularly between wealthy and influential white American citizens and poor and underrepresented minorities. This important Amendment reads in part, "No state may deny any person, under its government, equal protection of the law."
Since the passing of this Amendment, the state and federal courts have interpreted this Amendment to apply in various situations, including the equal administration of justice at sentencing and the equal application of laws, regardless of wealth and influence. Unfortunately, despite the ideology of equality endemic in this Amendment and its jurisprudent progeny, justice is not equal for all.
Since coming to power in January, the Trump administration has shown itself to be unfriendly to the prison reform movement that has been gaining momentum over the last decade. One of this administration's first orders of business included cancelling the Justice Department's defense of the FCC's ruling that prison telephone rates could not exceed certain limits. This ruling had been appealed, naturally, by the phone service providers and by several states (including Michigan) who make money from kickbacks on prisoners' already expensive phone calls. Although the Justice Department under President Obama had fought for limits on these exorbitant rates, President Trump did not consider these excessive rates oppressive.
Further eroding his support of equal justice, President Trump recently pardoned the very controversial and self-proclaimed "America's toughest sheriff" Joe Arpaio of his conviction for criminal contempt of a federal judge's order prohibiting unlawful immigration patrols. While I am an ardent supporter of state rights, I also find it nauseating that President Trump would pardon someone who made a career of humiliating people who had been convicted of a crime. Arpaio's pardon is a perfect illustration of how, despite the constitutional mandate of equal protection, wealthy and powerful people are often above the law. He willfully broke the law because he believed himself to be above it, and President Trump only confirmed this belief by pardoning him.
For me, Arpaio is the face of retributive justice gone awry. Since Arpaio is such an advocate for law and justice, he ought to have the privilege of experiencing that justice for his own crime. Perhaps a little time in his own pink underwear and tent cities and time spent on his own chain gangs would have softened his heart a little towards those he was quick to judge so harshly. Nobody will know for sure now, but maybe if Arpaio had to spend a little time living with the men he loved to humiliate, he would have gained an appreciation for their humanity and begun to view them with a heart of restoration. Sometimes the most vocal opponents of restorative justice can become its most ardent supporters, if only they experience the other side. Sadly, it took coming to prison for me to gain a deep appreciation for equal justice and to become an advocate for restorative justice--even for people like Sheriff Arpaio.
Since the passing of this Amendment, the state and federal courts have interpreted this Amendment to apply in various situations, including the equal administration of justice at sentencing and the equal application of laws, regardless of wealth and influence. Unfortunately, despite the ideology of equality endemic in this Amendment and its jurisprudent progeny, justice is not equal for all.
Since coming to power in January, the Trump administration has shown itself to be unfriendly to the prison reform movement that has been gaining momentum over the last decade. One of this administration's first orders of business included cancelling the Justice Department's defense of the FCC's ruling that prison telephone rates could not exceed certain limits. This ruling had been appealed, naturally, by the phone service providers and by several states (including Michigan) who make money from kickbacks on prisoners' already expensive phone calls. Although the Justice Department under President Obama had fought for limits on these exorbitant rates, President Trump did not consider these excessive rates oppressive.
Further eroding his support of equal justice, President Trump recently pardoned the very controversial and self-proclaimed "America's toughest sheriff" Joe Arpaio of his conviction for criminal contempt of a federal judge's order prohibiting unlawful immigration patrols. While I am an ardent supporter of state rights, I also find it nauseating that President Trump would pardon someone who made a career of humiliating people who had been convicted of a crime. Arpaio's pardon is a perfect illustration of how, despite the constitutional mandate of equal protection, wealthy and powerful people are often above the law. He willfully broke the law because he believed himself to be above it, and President Trump only confirmed this belief by pardoning him.
For me, Arpaio is the face of retributive justice gone awry. Since Arpaio is such an advocate for law and justice, he ought to have the privilege of experiencing that justice for his own crime. Perhaps a little time in his own pink underwear and tent cities and time spent on his own chain gangs would have softened his heart a little towards those he was quick to judge so harshly. Nobody will know for sure now, but maybe if Arpaio had to spend a little time living with the men he loved to humiliate, he would have gained an appreciation for their humanity and begun to view them with a heart of restoration. Sometimes the most vocal opponents of restorative justice can become its most ardent supporters, if only they experience the other side. Sadly, it took coming to prison for me to gain a deep appreciation for equal justice and to become an advocate for restorative justice--even for people like Sheriff Arpaio.
Thursday, September 7, 2017
Shhhh...It's Quiet Time!
Given the incessant fast-paced lifestyle of today's American citizen, it dawned on me that prisoners have a distinct advantage over their free counterparts. While most Americans are hurrying from one activity or commitment to another, chasing the American dream, America's prisoners are sitting with excessive time on their hands. This down time has the potential to make a significant difference in a prisoner's life, if he let's it.
Do you remember back in preschool or kindergarten when you were forced to take naps as a part of your school schedule? Maybe they weren't called naps, and maybe in today's fast-paced culture they don't even do this anymore. But I remember as a kid hating having to take naps. I wanted to go, go, go. I wanted to stay active doing something. And then, as an adult, I remember wishing to just close my eyes for a quick catnap in the middle of the day, but I didn't have the time for it.
In prison we have several count times throughout the day. I am awake for three of them, although I know there are several more throughout the night. These count times are designed to provide the corrections officers an opportunity to count everyone and make sure they are still accounted for. This prevents someone from coming up missing and it not being discovered for a long time. These count times are annoying because it means stopping what you are doing and going to your cell for 45 minutes or so until count time is over. It is a forced "quiet time."
For many prisoners, this a time to flip through useless daytime television, and for others it is an opportunity to read or take a short nap. Still others use this time to study, or to write letters. Surprisingly, in most prisons count time is usually quiet. Prisoners settle down and, for the most part, use the down time quietly. I have even used count times for meditation time in the past.
Many prisoners have no experience with self-reflection or contemplation. We are certainly not taught how to do this in prison, but we are afforded ample opportunity to develop these practices on our own. For those who develop these important skills, prison becomes an opportunity to reflect on one's past mistakes and grow into a more responsible and mature adult. I might hate having to be on someone else's schedule right now, but when I am eventually released, I know I will miss the forced down time. It has become a valuable part of my day.
Do you remember back in preschool or kindergarten when you were forced to take naps as a part of your school schedule? Maybe they weren't called naps, and maybe in today's fast-paced culture they don't even do this anymore. But I remember as a kid hating having to take naps. I wanted to go, go, go. I wanted to stay active doing something. And then, as an adult, I remember wishing to just close my eyes for a quick catnap in the middle of the day, but I didn't have the time for it.
In prison we have several count times throughout the day. I am awake for three of them, although I know there are several more throughout the night. These count times are designed to provide the corrections officers an opportunity to count everyone and make sure they are still accounted for. This prevents someone from coming up missing and it not being discovered for a long time. These count times are annoying because it means stopping what you are doing and going to your cell for 45 minutes or so until count time is over. It is a forced "quiet time."
For many prisoners, this a time to flip through useless daytime television, and for others it is an opportunity to read or take a short nap. Still others use this time to study, or to write letters. Surprisingly, in most prisons count time is usually quiet. Prisoners settle down and, for the most part, use the down time quietly. I have even used count times for meditation time in the past.
Many prisoners have no experience with self-reflection or contemplation. We are certainly not taught how to do this in prison, but we are afforded ample opportunity to develop these practices on our own. For those who develop these important skills, prison becomes an opportunity to reflect on one's past mistakes and grow into a more responsible and mature adult. I might hate having to be on someone else's schedule right now, but when I am eventually released, I know I will miss the forced down time. It has become a valuable part of my day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)