​

The First Step Act, implemented to address sentencing disparities, has led to over 4,000sentence reductions due to its retroactive application of the Fair Sentencing Act. Additionally,more than 2,600 individuals were granted compassionate release during the COVID-19pandemic (The Brennan Center for Justice). The criminal justice system in tour country isdesigned to maintain public safety and manage justice through law enforcement, courts, andprisons. Sentencing laws, which decide the consequences for criminal offenses, have played alarge role in shaping prison populations. Policies such as mandatory minimum sentences,three-strikes laws, and truth-in-sentencing measures have contributed to mass incarceration byimposing lengthy prison terms, often disproportionately affecting marginalized communities(The Sentencing Project). However, reforms like the First Step Act focus on a difference onsentencing by reducing overly long prison terms and providing rehabilitation chances (TheBrennan Center for Justice). The impact of these policies is evident in the fluctuatingincarceration rates and ongoing debates on criminal justice reform. The current sentencing lawsin the U.S. are causing a lot of problems, like mass incarceration, racial disparities, and highrates of reoffending. We need to change these laws to make a more just and effective system.There are many problems with the current sentencing laws. The Sentencing Projectreports that the rates of incarceration increased during the 1970’s. According to data recentlygathered by the Sentencing Project the prison rate is at 355 per 100,000 people. The rates arenot even among different racial backgrounds. They claim the growth is because of the sentencingpolicies. For example, the minimum sentencing and three strikes law. The AP News reports thatThe increase is due to overcrowding and longer sentences. With policies like the three strike lawand mandatory minimum sentencing it doesn’t take into consideration the judges using theirdiscretion. There is also unequal treatment of people of different races within the criminal justicesystem. For example, prison incarceration rate for Native Americans compared to the entirenation is 760 vs. 350 per 100,000 (International Centere for Prison Studies). There are a lot ofstudies that show ongoing racial concerns in sentencing and the need for reforms so that there ismore fair and equal rights in the prison systems. According to The Sentencing project, there arereforms that have incentive driven programs in hopes of improving fairness. A main challenge isthe number of criminals that return to crime behavior. For example, the RAND Corporation’s 2013 report, “The Effectiveness of Correctional Education: A Meta-Analysis of Programs ThatProvide Education to Incarcerated Adults,” found that correctional education programs reducedthe likelihood of reoffending by 43%. This brings up the point of needing better rehab programsto hopefully break the cycle. Not having resources available like vocational training, educationof a good support system prisoners are most likely going to continue to have a hard time goingback to day to day life outside of prison. The reform programs hold them to accountability.There are many arguments for sentencing reform. There are concerns for the mandatoryminimum sentences with little to no rehabilitation and also concerns for the large number ofnonviolent offenders. It can be argued that non traditional sentencing helps with the rate thatprisoners reoffend and that it promotes justice. One argument as mentioned above is eliminatingmandatory minimum sentences. These sentences cause the judge to hand down a sentence without taking into consideration the circumstances. In turn it the judge is not able to customizethe sentence based on the circumstances surrounding it. These sentences ignore past criminalhistory, intent or context of the crime. As a citizen, the concern would be not considering if theywould be a threat to those outside of prison. According to the American Civil Liberties Union,mandatory minimum sentences have increased the number of incarcerations because the lengthprison sentences unequally affect people of color. This gives prosecutors excessive leverage.An example would be someone who is convicted of another non violent crime such as a drugcrime could be facing the same sentence of someone with a history of a violent crime, eventhough the risk to the outside world is less. Another sentencing reform argument may be thealternative sentencing model. In some other countries judges are allowed to look at individualcircumstances and offer rehabilitation sentences. This would allow for educational andvocational programs. Studies show that allowing for case-by-case decisions on sentencing, asseen in Norway’s model, can lead to more effective outcomes by focusing on rehabilitation ratherthan simply punitive measures. The U.S. could benefit from adopting a more flexible sentencingsystem that empowers judges to apply rehabilitative measures tailored to the individual, ratherthan relying on automatic, inflexible minimums (Prison Policy Initiative). International Centerfor Prison Studies discusses the success of rehabilitation-based sentencing models. They reportthey have been successful at reducing both recidivism rates and improving the lives of formeroffenders. In Norway this model resulted in one of the lowest rates, with only 20 % returningwithin 2 years. The National Institute of Justice does not zone in on punishment but repairing theharm done to victims and community by opening up communication and holding themaccountable. One last argument could be alternative sentencing for non-violent offenders. TheNational Institute for justice discusses how community service or probation is more fitting fordrug offenses or property crimes. This allows them to stay in the community, contribute to thecommunity, work and still be held accountable.With every good argument comes a counter argument such as restorative justice is toolenient, reducing sentences may lead to more crime, and victims rights are compromised insentence reform. Some people argue that restorative justice may not be strict enough by notholding them accountable for what they did. Some believe that being overly empathetic results init is not inflicting appropriate consequences (Prison Policy Initiative). In an article by CindyChang, she talks about a proposition in California that would reduce penalties for certain crimes.Law enforcement and others were critical of the proposal saying it lead to higher crime rates forthings like theft and drug possession. They argued that individuals convicted of those crimeswere either not sent to prison or released early. The argument continued that the light sentenceswere not holding criminals accountable and encouraged criminal behavior. Another pointChangs article brought up was the fact that violent offenders continued to face harsher sentenceswhich led to gaps in reform which may limit the effectiveness of the policy. The thirdThe counter argument focuses on how victims rights are compromised in sentence reform. In thearticle talking about Victims’ Rights Are Compromised in Sentence Reform, it discussed howvictims may feel like the punishment was not fully served. This article brought up how pleabargains can speed up the process to give then quicker closure but also causing concern that thepunishment did not fit the crime (“Victims’ Rights Are Compromised in Sentence Reform”).The Brennan Center has the same concerns that justice is being served and also adds that effortsto reduce prison populations may shift the focus toward rehab and leave the victims withoutClosure.In conclusion, there is a divide in whether it’s better to focus on the criminals beinghumans and showing empathy and compassion versus reform being intended as punishment butactually increasing crime. The U.S. criminal justice system needs to shift its focus from strictsentencing to rehabilitative and restorative approaches to ensure fairness and reduce the rate ofrepeat offenders. Seeing criminals as human and worthy of introducing back into society asassets to the communities in which they live is important.