'Equal Protection in Criminal Punishment\r'

'Equal resistance in vicious Punishment The 14th Amendment articulates that no separate sh completely â€Å" defy to any person within its jurisdiction the friction match protection of the laws” (Sullivan and Gunther 486). It is nearly im mathematical though, for the catch discourse of solely(a)(a) persons, since every law affects batch differently. â€Å"This want female genital organ non liter eachy require equal manipulation of both persons, since almost all laws companyify in few way, by imposing burdens on or granting benefits to nearly population and non others” (Sullivan and Gunther 486).The Equal Protection article was meant for the application of all laws equally, non necessarily equal treatment of all people. in that location is a big difference in the 2. The people most adversely affected by these iniquitous laws ar generally minorities and those from low socio-economic groups. The in equating in sentencings of the feloniouss is often t he central point of statutory discussion. The most debatable issuing when it comes to criminal punishment is the argona surrounding the finale penalty. It is often attached unjustly and undeservingly to minorities. head for the hills is the most arguable and monumental concomitantor in determining the aloofness and severity of a criminal’s punishment. racial discrimination has been unpatterned in our effectual clay in the recent and continues to keep be to this day. Our court arrangement has deprived minorities of their rights throughout the age. In Strauder v. tungsten Virginia, the State excluded melanises from the gore. The State law stated that â€Å"all clean male persons who be twenty-one years of age and who atomic number 18 citizens of this State shall be probable to serve as jurors” (Sullivan and Gunther 487).A low-spirited spell find out about trial in the 1800’s against an all pureness instrument panel doesn’t sta nd a chance. The accost found that to deny citizen participation in the disposal of arbitrator solely on racial thousand â€Å"is practically a brand upon them, affixed by law; an assertion of their inferiority, and a stimulant to that line of achievement injustice which is an impediment to securing to individuals of the operate that equal referee which the law aims to secure to all others” (Sullivan and Gunther 487). This case was a major turning point in racial discrimination in our legal system.Minorities were starting to be seen as people, and not just objects. But at this time, we were still far from our goal of tot equality among all people. In a more(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) new-fangled case, Swain v. Alabama, the Court held that a defendant in a criminal case is not constitutionally allowed to a balanced number of his race on the trial control panel or the dialog box panel. on that point is no evidence in this case that the instrument pan el filling committee applied different instrument panel selection standards as between scorchs and whites (Swain v. Alabama, 380 U. S. 209, 1965). There whitethorn not be evidence, but it is quite explicit that in that respect is an disparity here.How can a man facing a wipeout penalty be put up against an all white jury during a time of racial tension? A flawed system of selection of jury panels is not comparable to intended racial discrimination (Swain v. Alabama, 380 U. S. 209, 1965). Although the selection of an all white jury was not desire out, society during this time was racially divided. The principle proclaimed in Strauder v. West Virginia, that a State denies a black defendant equal protection when it puts him on trial before a jury from which members of his race fool been purposefully excluded, was reaffirmed in Batson v.Kentucky (Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 84). The Equal Protection Clause assures the defendant that the State entrust not prohibit members of his race from the jury venire on account of race, or on the inaccurate confidence that members of his race as a group be not eligible to serve as jurors. By denying a person participation in jury duty on the basis of his race, the State as well as unconstitutionally discriminates against the barred juror (Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U. S. 85). This difference in the selection of jurors has damaged confidence in our legal system.The lack of confidence has in turn caused contrariety in the sentencing of criminals, mostly dealings with minorities. There is no doubt that minorities receive harsher and longer times. â€Å"As of June 1998, entirely seven white men had been executed in the United States for violent expiry black victims. In the alike(p) 1976-1998 period, 115 black men were executed for killing white victims” (Cole 132). These numbers prove that blacks have historically received harsher treatments than whites. This connects to the selection of juries. Juries have a wide affect on the sentencing of criminals.A predominantly white jury is more than potential to convict a black man, than a predominantly black jury is. â€Å"Juries remain predominantly white in most of the country, and evidently their sympathies lie more strongly with white than black victims” (Cole 133). A large study conducted by Professors David Baldus, George Woodworth, and Charles Pulaski, showed that there was a large disparity in the racial breakdown of the death penalty. They found that defendants charged with killing white victims received the death penalty football team times more often than defendants charged with killing black victims (Cole 133).The Equal Protection Clause was set out to protect from this indifference, but this clearly shows that it has not through so. Equal treatment of all people has yet to be achieved today and racial inequality is still ever-present. Criminal sentencing when it comes to blacks and whites is vastly different and unju st. The disproportion of sentences given to blacks and whites in dealing with medicines is ridiculous. First of all, the gap in sentencing when it comes to commotion cocain and pulverize cocain is also big.Under federal sentencing guidelines, a small-time snatch star caught selling 5 grams of agree receives the analogous prison house sentence as a large-scale powder cocaine dealer convicted of distributing 500 grams of powder cocaine (Cole 142). To me, powder cocaine is just as breakneck and addicting as crack cocaine. The large gap in sentencings for the two offenses places a higher value on the danger level of crack, when in all actuality they are on the same level. The increase in policing of the subordinate crack offenders has caused us to neglect the big medicate traffickers.As it is, we already do not have profuse federal law enforcement to police all the drug dealers out there. By paying more economic aid to the people with small amounts of crack cocaine, we are permit others get by with more pulverise cocaine. This puts more powdered cocaine on the streets, because dealers are brave to receive the consequences since the pay-off to conviction rate is much more in their raise. An offender would receive a required minimum of 10 years if they were to get caught with 5,000 grams of powdered cocaine, while a person would receive the same sentence for creation caught with only 50 grams of crack cocaine.Crack cocaine is the only drug that carries a mandatory prison sentence for a first-time possession offense. A person convicted in federal court of simple-minded possession of 5 grams of crack is subject to a mandatory five-year prison term while a person convicted of possessing 5 grams of powder forget believably receive a probation sentence. To solve this problem, we need to bridge the gap between the two sentencings. Crack cocaine is the poor man’s powdered cocaine. The popularity of crack cocaine was associated with its ch eap price, which for the first time do cocaine available to a wider economic class (thesentencingproject. rg). More than often, the biggest users of crack cocaine are people of lower social status. This in turn implicates that more crack cocaine users are African Americans. As a result of this, blacks are receiving more prison time when it comes to crack cocaine. African Americans make up one-third of crack cocaine users, with the other two-thirds be white and Hispanic (The Defenders Online). About 90 pct of federal crack cocaine defendants are black (Cole 142). African American drug defendants have a 20 percent greater chance of being sentenced to prison than white drug defendants (The Sentencing parturiency).Why is this the case? The legal system inadvertently targets blacks by placing higher sentences on crack cocaine offenses. A considerable racial disparity in prosecutions and imprisonment has endured for too long. on with disproportionate law enforcement procedures that ai m towards blacks, the crack sentencing guidelines have resulted in more than 80 percent of crack cocaine defendants being African American, although in all actuality, a majority of crack offenders are white or Hispanic (The Sentencing Project).With the punishment of crack cocaine so severe for low level offenses, the prison incarceration rate has risen, causing us as taxpayers more money. American prisons and jails house nearly two million people and Blacks face incarceration pass judgment more than six times that of clean-livings (Schlesinger). The inequality in our justice system has caused more minorities to be locked up, which in result is a financial burden on the American taxpayers. By equalizing the gap in criminal sentencing for all races, we can solve the problems from within our legal system.The racial inequality that is present in our justice system also follows in the sentencing of the death penalty. There seems to be a consistent factor in those on death row. â€Å" Those being executed and awaiting their deaths are no different from those selected for execution in the past: virtually all were poor; about half(prenominal) are members of racial minorities; and the overwhelming majority where sentenced to death for crimes against white victims” (Bright 433). Over time, our legal system has determined a â€Å"small” value of importance on minorities and this was built upon, to where whites did not notice this inequality.There has to be round sort of factor that influences why there are more minorities on death row. A possible influence on the situation could be the fact that most prosecutors are white. â€Å"98 percent of all state death penalty state prosecutors are white and in eighteen of the thirty-eight death penalty states, prosecutors are exclusively white” (Free 187). White prosecutors may not knowingly have a racial bias in their head, but it is evident when they are trying to seek the death penalty. State courts we re 4. 3 times more likely to sentence those who killed whites than those that killed blacks (Free 185).These same courts were 1. 1 times more likely to black defendants to death than any other defendant of another race (Free 185). While the state prosecutors are pressing for the death penalty, the defendant is supplied with an insufficient lawyer. The jury is more than likely to listen to the more certifiable state prosecutor and be persuaded by what he has to say, over the under qualified attorney supplied by the state. This has resulted in more successful cases in favor of the state prosecutors. This reoccurring situation is ever-so-present in today’s legal system.Minorities are getting shafted in the American justice system and nothing is being done to prevent this from continuing to happen in the future. ‘ all men are created equal… ‘ may be what the Declaration of Independence says, but in all reality, some men receive better treatment than others. The actual reality of the Declaration of Independence is that all free, white, landowning men are created equal. For that reason, inequality has always been present in the United States legal system and maintains to exist today; though, the inequality currently in the system is not as obvious as what it erstwhile was.We have made little progress towards total equality. Anywhere you look in today’s world, you can find some sort of inequality or injustice. I firmly believe we will always have a racial prejudice in the world no matter what, because there will always be the people that can’t get over their racial indifferences. Although we will not fully achieve the goal of racially equality, we can make positive steps prior by first addressing the problems associated with in our justice system. Race is the largest influencing factor in the sentencing of criminals, especially when it comes o dealing with the death penalty. Works Cited Bright, Stephen B. â€Å"Discriminatio n, Death, and Denial: The Tolerance of racial Discrimination in Infliction of the Death Penalty. ” Santa Clara police force Review Vol. 35 (1995. ): 433. Free Jr. , Marvin D. racial Issues in Criminal Justice: the Case of African Americans. Westport: Criminal Justice Press, 2004. 185,187. Schlesinger, Traci. â€Å"How Determinate Sentencing Contributed to the Prison flesh out: The Failure of Race Neutral Policies” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Law and Society Association, Jul 06, 2006. ttp://www. allacademic. com/meta/p94999_index. hypertext mark-up language â€Å"Sentencing disparity: Crack cocaine v fine-grained Cocaine. ” The Defenders Online. 27 May 2009. 16 Dec. 2009. http://www. thedefendersonline. com/2009/05/27/sentencing-disparity-crack-cocaine-v-powder-cocaine/ Sullivan, Kathleen M. and Gerald Gunther. perfect Law: 16th Ed. New York: Foundation Press, 2007. The Sentencing Project: Research and Advocacy for Reform. â€Å"Feder al Crack Cocaine Sentencing. ” 13 December 2009. http://www. sentencingproject. org/doc/publications/dp_crack_sentencing. pdf\r\n'