Mediaboss Marketing

Mandatory minimum sentences have unfairly and disproportionately incarcerated a generation of minorities. Eric Holder, the attorney general under President Obama, issued guidelines to U.S. Attorneys that they should refrain from seeking long sentences for nonviolent drug offenders. I agreed with him then and still do. In fact, I'm the author of a bipartisan bill with Senator Leahy to change the law on this matter. Until we pass that bill, though, the discretion on enforcement -- and the lives of many young drug offenders -- lies with the current attorney general

The attorney general's new guidelines, a reversal of a policy that was working, will accentuate the injustice in our criminal justice system. We should be treating our nation's drug epidemic for what it is -- a public health crisis, not an excuse to send people to prison and turn a mistake into a tragedy.

And make no mistake, the lives of many drug offenders are ruined the day they receive that long sentence the attorney general wants them to have.

Yet today, a third of African-American males are still prevented from voting, primarily because of the War on Drugs.

The War on Drugs has disproportionately affected young black males.

Why are the arrest rates so lopsided? Because it is easier to go into urban areas and make arrests than suburban areas. Arrest statistics matter when cities apply for federal grants. It doesn't take much imagination to understand that it's easier to round up, arrest, and convict poor kids than it is to convict rich kids.

I know a guy about my age in Kentucky who was arrested and convicted for growing marijuana plants in his apartment closet in college.

Thirty years later, he still can't vote, can't own a gun, and, when he looks for work, he must check the box -- the box that basically says, "I'm a convicted felon, and I guess I'll always be one."

He hasn't been arrested or convicted for 30 years -- but still can't vote or have his Second Amendment rights. Getting a job is nearly impossible for him.

Mandatory sentencing automatically imposes a minimum number of years in prison for specific crimes -- usually related to drugs.

I want to go the opposite way from the attorney general. That's why I've partnered with Senator Leahy and once again will be reintroducing the Justice Safety Valve Act.

This isn't about legalizing drugs. It is about making the punishment more fitting and not ruining more lives.

The legislation is short and simple. It amends current law to grant judges authority to impose a sentence below a statutory mandatory minimum.

In other words, we are not repealing mandatory minimums on the books -- we are merely allowing a judge to issue a sentence below a mandatory minimum if certain requirements are met.

We need this legislation because while there is an existing safety valve in current law, it is very limited. It has a strict five-part test, and only about 23% of all drug offenders qualified for the safety valve.

The injustice of mandatory minimum sentences is impossible to ignore when you hear the stories of the victims.

His friend turned out to be a police informant, and he was charged with dealing drugs. Horner pleaded guilty and was later sentenced to the mandatory minimum of 25 years in jail.

This young man had been in a car where drugs were found. I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure one of us might have been in a car in our youth where someone might have had drugs. Before the arrest, according to news reports, this young man was going to be the first in his family to go to college.

Each case should be judged on its own merits. Mandatory minimums prevent this from happening.

Mandatory minimum sentencing has done little to address the very real problem of drug abuse while also doing great damage by destroying so many lives, and most Americans now realize it.

I urge the attorney general to reconsider his recent action. But even more importantly, I urge my colleagues to consider bipartisan legislation to fix this problem in the law where it should be handled. Congress can end this injustice, and I look forward to leading this fight for justice.

Excerpt from:
Rand Paul: Sessions' sentencing plan would ruin lives - CNN

On "America's News HQ" this afternoon, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) revealed that another senator confided in him that he was surveilled by the Obama administration.

Earlier this week, Paul said reporters have told him they have evidence he was a target of Obama administration spying.

This is the first time that Paul mentioned another senator is also concerned about the Obama administration's surveillance.

He said if this proves to be true, it's a much bigger story than any allegations about collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the presidential election.

"It's about your own government spying on the opposition party," Paul said. "That would be enormous if it's true."

Paul told Fox Business Networks Charles Payne on Wednesday that he's asked the White House and the House and Senate intelligence committees to investigate.

He said if the intelligence community is indeed being used for politics, it's a "very, very serious crime."

Paul added that the possible illegal use of intelligence community resources for political purposes raises chilling questions.

They have so much power to collect," Paul said. "I mean, they have the power to collect information, invade your privacy but also to destroy you."

Watch more above, and see the full Fox Business interview below.

McCain on Dems Crying Wolf: 'They Floated Impeachment on Election Night'

Conway on Anderson Cooper's Eye-Roll: I Face Sexism Often in TV Interviews

Acting FBI Director: 'Not Accurate' to Say Comey Lost Support of Rank and File

Enraged Dad to GOP Lawmaker: 'You've Been Single Greatest Threat to My Family'

More:
Paul: Another Senator Told Me He Was Surveilled by Obama Admin ... - Fox News Insider

LISTEN TO TLRS LATEST PODCAST:

by Micah J. Fleck

According to Rare:

Sen. Rand Paul has been one of the leading voices for criminal justice reform throughout his entire senate career, particularly of eliminating what he sees as draconian mandatory minimum sentencing laws. When Attorney General Jeff Sessions made it publicon Friday that he woulddirect federal prosecutors to seek the harshest sentences for non-violent drug offenders, the announcement drew a quick rebuke from Sen. Paul.

Paul added, Instead, we should treat our nations drug epidemic as a health crisis and less as a lock em up and throw away the key problem.

Sen. Paul wrote in a USA Today op-ed in 2013, Mandatory minimums most harm those lacking in the means to defend themselves. These laws disproportionately target the poor and minorities.

Getting rid of mandatory minimums simply means allowing judges to use their discretion in sentencing, rather than having to follow the current, draconian federal parameters that are totally detached from the very human situation at hand, Paul added.

Is this Senator Pauls new claim to fame? He has been at this issue for some time now, and it always wins bipartisan support. Not to mention it is objectively noble across the board. Word of advice to Senator Paul: if you run for president again Run on this, not on your weird, divisive black market baby parts mantra.

Action for LibertyBipartisan Supporteconomics of libertyinjusticeLibertarian-ishmarijuanaminoritiesrand paulRepublicansenatorwar on drugs

Follow this link:
Rand Paul: Sessions's New Drug Policy is "Injustice" to Minorities - The Libertarian Republic

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

I know one other senator whos already confided to me that he was surveilled by the Obama administration, including his phone calls, he told Fox News on Wednesday.

So when this all comes out, if there are political figures from the opposition party, its a story bigger than any of the allegations with regard to Russian collusion, he said.

Earlier this month, Paul announced that sources have told him that he has been surveilled by the Obama administration, and that he has requested information from the White House and the congressional intelligence committees on whether he has ever been surveilled, unmasked, or searched for in intelligence reports.

Its about your own government spying on the opposition party, that would be enormous if true, he said. I dont know the truth. Weve asked the intel committees, House and Senate, and Ive also asked the White House, because there is this whole discussion of Susan Rice unmasking people, he said.

Former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn was fired in February, after a phone call he had with Russian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak was leaked to the Washington Post.

Listening in on an Americans phone calls is illegal without a warrant, but it can happen legally during surveillance of a foreign target. If Americans are caught up in surveillance of a foreign target, their identities are supposed to be masked, or concealed.

However, U.S. officials can request to have their names unmasked if it is necessary to understanding the context of the communications, with the approval of the agency conducting the surveillance.

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper revealed that last year, 1,934 Americans names were unmasked.

Last month it was reported that Susan Rice had unmasked Trump campaign officials which she has not denied, but only claimed that it was not illegal.

There was no reason for her to unmask people. Hers was not a position of investigation. Hers was a political position. And for her to get involved with unmasking Trump officials is alarming. If it happened to other people, its even more alarming, he said.

But were going to try to get to the bottom of this. And its a very secret world. You have to realize that its a world so secret most members of Congress are never allowed.

Read more:
Rand Paul: Another Senator Was Surveilled by the Obama Administration - Breitbart News

U.S. Sen. Rand Paul is criticizing Attorney General Jeff Sessions for directing federal prosecutors to charge defendants with the most serious crimes they can pursue.

The new guidelines are a departure from an Obama-era policy that eased prosecutions of people with non-violent drug offenses.

In 2013, then-Attorney General Eric Holder directed prosecutors to avoid charging people with crimes that carry mandatory minimum sentences, which require judges to impose lengthier prison terms.

In a statement, Paul said the reprisal of the tough on crime policy isnt a good idea.

Mandatory minimum sentences have unfairly and disproportionately incarcerated too many minorities for too long, Paul said. Attorney General Sessions new policy will accentuate that injustice. Instead, we should treat our nations drug epidemic as a health crisis and less as a lock em up and throw away the key problem.

Paul has pushed for reforms to the criminal justice system, including reduction of mandatory minimum sentences on drug crimes, expungement of felony records and restoration of voting rights, though the proposals havent garnered enough support to get a floor vote.

However, Paul voted in favor of Sessions confirmation earlier this year. Sessions has repeatedly criticized the Obama administration for being soft on crime and accused the former presidents policies of leading to violent crimes.

Sessions policy amounts to a return to strategies conceived under former Attorney General John Ashcroft, who directed federal prosecutors to charge people with the most serious crimes possible.

Under the Obama-era policy, defendants who didnt belong to large drug trafficking organizations qualified to be charged with crimes that didnt carry long mandatory minimum sentences.

This week, Sessions issued a memoto Department of Justice staff ordering federal prosecutors to charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense.

This policy affirms our responsibility to enforce the law, is moral and just, and produces consistency, Sessions wrote. This policy fully utilizes the tools Congress has given us.

Prosecutors who wish to not pursue the most serious charges possible would have to get approval from a U.S. attorney or assistant attorney general.

Kerry Harvey, who was the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Kentucky until earlier this year, said implementation of the policy will depend on each U.S. attorneys office.

But on the face of it you would expect that the sentences, particularly in drug trafficking cases, would be longer, Harvey said.

Continue reading here:
Rand Paul Pans Sessions' 'Tough On Crime' Prosecution Policy - WKU Public Radio