Jeff Sessions and Criminal Justice in Massachusetts

By Heather Busk, Progressive Watertown

Do you know what North Korea and the United States have in common? They have similar per capita rates of incarceration, among the highest in the world. But lately some states have used an approach called justice reinvestment to dramatically cut the number of people in prison while continuing to lower crime rates, saving money in the process. In Massachusetts, a few bills are up for a vote this legislative session that take this approach to justice reform.

The “Tough on Crime” approach that came into vogue in the 80s and 90s led to an explosion in the prison population (especially when applied to non-violent drug crimes) but only a limited reduction in crime. It just isn’t a very efficient use of taxpayer money.

Justice reinvestment takes a different approach. It shrinks the number of inmates by reducing sentences and removing mandatory minimums for some crimes, restoring judicial discretion in sentencing, and expanding the use of parole. In contrast, over the past few decades Massachusetts has drastically cut the number of prisoners receiving parole, instead letting half of former inmates be flung back into society without any form of supervision. This makes them more likely to reoffend. Other proven ways to reduce recidivism are counseling, education, reentry, and jobs programs.

A few pieces of legislation have been proposed in the Massachusetts legislature that take this approach. HD.2714/SD.1128, An Act for justice reinvestment, is a comprehensive justice reform package. Among other things, it reduces sentences and calls for funding of jobs programs, not only for former inmates but also for people who fit at least two of these categories:

“is under 25 years of age; is a victim of violence; is a veteran; does not have a high school diploma (if over 18 years of age); has been convicted of a felony; has been unemployed or has had family income below 250% of the federal poverty level for six months or more; or lives in a census tract where over 20% of the population fall below the federal poverty”

HD.1794/SD.500 An Act to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences with regards to drug crimes, is a bill with just a few parts of HD.2714/SD.1128. It gets rid of mandatory minimum sentences for drug crimes and gives judges discretion in sentencing for nonviolent drug offenses.

A related bill is SD.1389: An Act to reduce the criminalization of poverty, that reduces court fees and bans sending people to jail for inability to pay the fees.

At the national level, the appointment of Jeff Sessions warrants some concern for those who value justice.

The power of the U.S. Attorney General lies in three things:

  1. Setting priorities for federal law enforcement about what kinds of things to investigate.
  2. Deciding what laws to defend and which cases to bring to federal court.
  3. Selectively giving money to states and towns.

Sessions is unlikely to devote many resources to issues progressives care about. For instance, he may not investigate excessive use of force by police. He holds the view that bad behavior is caused by a few bad apples rather than any systemic problems. To his credit, he has admitted that there is some racial bias in policing, but he has regularly opposed federal investigation into police misconduct. With a president who has called Black Lives Matter a “threat” that should be investigated by the Attorney General, this is not an encouraging sign.

He will likely not do much to uphold civil rights, especially not LGBT rights–he is a staunch opponent of same-sex marriage. Although the Constitution and federal law bans discrimination of various types, it doesn’t matter what the law says if it isn’t enforced.* Fortunately Massachusetts and other states can take it upon themselves enforce to enforce similar state-level protections.

So what will he focus on instead? We can expect that he will vigorously support Trump’s policies on deporting undocumented immigrants and probably enforce the Muslim ban. (He’s no Sally Yates, bless her heart.) He twice tried to pass legislation to make English the official language of government, i.e. removing your right to get government services in a language you understand. I think it’s fair to say he’s not a friend to immigrants.

Many have been upset over allegations that he is racist but less attention has been given to his opposition to legalizing marijuana. He has even said that “Good people don’t smoke marijuana”. Massachusetts and the other states and cities that have legalized or decriminalized marijuana could face increased federal interference. The Obama administration generally declined to enforce the federal laws in such places, to allow the fledgling experiment in legalization a chance to show results. Left alone, it may succeed or it may fail, and in either case we will have a better sense of what works. Under Sessions, as marijuana business owners and employees face prison and banks risk having their assets seized if they loan to these businesses, the prospects for success are dim. It would be a shame to undo decades of work, especially now that even many Republicans have become open to a softer approach to drug enforcement.

Sessions has many other troubling positions, too many to name here. For instance, he favors private prisons, so he may undo the DOJ’s recent moratorium on private federal prisons.

There are many threats to civil liberty under Sessions and Trump, so it is up to us at the state and local levels to defend and make lives better for our fellow citizens. We can start by passing HD.2714/SD.1128, HD.1794/SD.500, and SD.1389.

*As a fun example, Obama Attorney General Eric Holder stopped defending Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act in court, before the Supreme Court finally declared it unconstitutional. That made Jeff Sessions really angry.

Sources:

http://www.politifact.com/georgia/statements/2013/jan/14/hank-johnson/does-us-have-highest-percentage-people-prison/

https://www.bja.gov/programs/justicereinvestment/index.html

Crime, Cost & Consequences

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/11/18/8-ways-jeff-sessions-could-change-criminal-justice#.BOsRgTAFw

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/jeff-sessions-views-attorney-general-233383

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jeff-sessions-race-civil-rights/story?id=43633501

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/18/politics/donald-trump-black-lives-matter/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/18/jeff-sessions-trump-attorney-general-criminal-justice-reform

http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Jeff_Sessions_Immigration.htm

http://fortune.com/2017/01/10/jeff-sessions-marijuana-confirmation-hearing/

In the Dark, Undoing the Voters’ Will

On November 8, almost 54 percent of voters in the Commonwealth voted to legalize recreational marijuana, an important step in advancing social and racial justice and combating over-policing and mass incarceration. However, yesterday, in a special session, without any public hearings or public notice, 7 legislators were able to postpone the opening date for recreational marijuana stores by six months, creating a limbo situation in which possession is legal but retail is not.

We are very disappointed, but not surprised, by such behavior. If the Legislature had concerns about the wording of Question 4, they had ample time before the election to pass their own bill or to offer a substitute ballot question. Instead, they chose to undermine the democratic will of the Commonwealth in a most undemocratic way. The Legislature has a history of avoiding public debate and recorded votes—as well as a history of weakening or even repealing ballot initiatives. If Massachusetts is to be a model for other states, that has to change.

Your legislators are supposed to work for you, and they deserve to hear from you. You can find contact information for your state representative and state senator here. And when you’re done calling the Legislature, call Charlie Baker to urge him not to sign the delay.

JP Progressives take on Criminal Justice Reform

Report from the field  — JPProgressives convened a community conversation on mass incarceration, following the lead of their chapter members. Engaging with neighbors, activists, advocates and legislators, JPP is doing the work of bending the arc towards justice. By joining the Jobs Not Jails coalition, the JP chapter of Progressive Mass will continue to represent progressive grassroots commitment to social justice, and help lead the organization to productive engagement and action. The chapter invites you to join the JNJ rally on Dec 13. More details are below.

Criminal Justice Reform is a core objective of our Progressive Platform. The Massachusetts Legislature will reconvene in January. Our Legislative Agenda will once again indicate which bills need our advocacy to get us closer to the goal of undoing the injustices of mass incarceration. Stay tuned for more from us on the legislative front. 

 More Than 150 Neighbors Attend Forum in Jamaica Plain to Discuss Mass Incarceration

This year, a standing room only crowd of nearly 200 people filled the First Baptist Church in Jamaica Plain for a forum on the problem of mass incarceration.  The event was organized by JP Progressives, whose members had previously established mass incarceration as their top social concern.  The forum was co-sponsored by 10 other organizations, including the Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Development Corporation, the Mildred Hailey Tenant Organization, Black Lives Matter Boston, and the Jobs Not Jails Coalition.

The keynote speaker at the event was Rahsaan Hall, Director of the ACLU Racial Justice Program.

Mr. Hall pointed out that the United States has one of the highest incarceration rates of any country in the world and that, although the rate in Massachusetts is lower than in most states, it still compares to some of the worst rates internationally.  

In addition, Mr. Hall spoke about the extreme racial disparities in the application of our state criminal justice laws, with disparities in Massachusetts being worse than in many other states. He noted that in Massachusetts black and Latino incarceration rates are eight and six times higher respectively than for whites and, although blacks and whites use drugs at similar rates, the rate of black incarceration for drug crimes is significantly higher than for whites. Moreover, in some Massachusetts counties the median bail amount set for black defendants is four to five times higher than for whites. In June of 2015, for example, in Barnstable County, the median amount of bail set for blacks was $20,000 compared to only $5,000 for whites.

The forum included a panel comprised of State Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz, Suffolk County Sheriff Steven Tompkins, Boston Deputy Director of Public Safety Initiatives Conan Harris, and director of the Jobs Not Jails Coalition Lew Finfer.

Senator Chang-Díaz, who has led criminal justice reform legislation, spoke about the importance of current legislative initiatives.  Some of these bills include efforts to repeal mandatory minimum drug sentences, which often impose long sentences for relatively minor drug crimes with little discretion allowed to judges, and bail system reform, so that people who have not been convicted of a crime are not forced to spend weeks and months in prison because they cannot afford bail. Senator Chang-Díaz has also introduced a bill to establish a trust fund with the savings from improvements in the criminal justice system. This money would then be used to support programs for job training and drop-out prevention to keep youth out of prison in the first place.

Sheriff Tompkins discussed the need for services in prison to prepare people for reentry into society, and Conan Harris talked about Boston’s programs to help youths after their release from prison, including those that provide training and employment in the building trades and within city government. Lew Finfer noted that Massachusetts is entering a crucial period with respect to criminal justice reform.  In August of last year Governor Baker, House Speaker DeLeo, Senate President Rosenberg, and State Supreme Court Chief Justice Gants requested that the Council of State Governments study the criminal justice system in Massachusetts and make recommendations for reform. Based on this report, the four key officials will jointly propose legislation in the next few months. Finfer explained that this type of collaboration is extremely unusual and will create momentum for reform, but he also stressed that advocates must organize to ensure that the proposed legislation is as comprehensive and effective as possible.

Moderator Melissa Threadgill of the Crime and Justice Institute asked the panel why reforms in some “red states” have been implemented much more quickly than in liberal Massachusetts.  

Panelists pointed to the enormous costs of incarcerating large numbers of people for long periods of time, which has strained state budgets in many conservative states, but also to the lack of a strong Republican opposition in Massachusetts, which made it easier for Democratic leaders to avoid requiring their members to vote on contentious measures.

During audience questions, some expressed concern that the Council of State Governments study was looking at the wrong issues, focusing on recidivism and probation rather than on preventing imprisonment.  A criminal defense attorney questioned the arbitrary nature of many of the rules governing his clients in solitary confinement, such as the need for shackling when they meet with him and their confinement to a cell for 23 hours a day.  Other audience members raised the need for services that would support youth at risk before they faced imprisonment.

At the end of the program, JP Progressives urged audience members to sign a letter to their state representatives urging them to pass legislation on this critical issue. The State House partly heeded the call from many advocacy groups and included $250,000 for job training and reentry services for formerly incarcerated people returning to their communities.

But work remains to be done on reducing the burden of bail and probation, increasing mental health and job training supports in and out of prison, reducing unnecessarily long sentences, and reinvesting the money from reduced recidivism in the communities most harmed by mass incarceration.

JP Progressives announced has joined the Jobs Not Jails Coalition and will continue organizing events in Jamaica Plain.  

The Jobs Not Jails coalition plans a rally to demand real criminal justice reform from 10-11 AM on Tuesday, December 13, at 140 Bowdoin Street downtown.

If you want to attend or are interested in becoming involved, please contact us at moreinfo@jpprogressives.com

SHNS: Progressive group stakes out position on ballot questions

“Progressive group stakes out position on ballot questions” — Andy Metzger, State House News Service (9/1/2016)

**

Progressive Massachusetts, a political nonprofit, has endorsed ballot questions that would legalize marijuana and restrict animal products sold in the state, and opposed measures that could open the door to an additional slots parlor and more charter schools.

The group, which has about 350 members according to its president, voted “overwhelmingly” to join the campaign opposing Question 2, which would allow for 12 new or newly expanded charter schools annually, regardless of the existing statutory cap.

“I think there’s a recognition, particularly on Question 2, that public schools are a community benefit, and that really having an unlimited drain of funding without local democratic control isn’t something to build communities,” Josh Tauber, a Somerville Democrat and Progressive Massachusetts volunteer who chairs the group’s elections and endorsement committee, told the News Service.

Charter proponents note the schools are public and say limits on charters exclude students in troubled districts from educational choice.

Susan Davidoff, the president of Progressive Massachusetts, said the group has been around for five years, has chapters around the state, and has worked to support a surtax on high earners, minimum wage increases and paid sick leave.

The group’s endorsements were announced this week after an email poll.

Davidoff said the group “most enthusiastically” opposed the charter school question and would not be as active on the three other questions.

This year the group opposes Question 1, which would allow an additional slots parlor next to a race track; and supports Question 4, legalizing marijuana; and Question 3, which requires ample room for egg-laying hens, veal calves and pigs whose products are produced or sold in Massachusetts.

Tauber said for him personally the marijuana question is a “social justice” issue, as criminal records for marijuana crimes can limit people’s opportunities.

“Drug policy in this country has been so messed up for so long that frankly we need to start over on a lot of it,” Tauber said. Voters in 2008 decriminalized possession of up to an ounce of marijuana, and in 2012 they legalized marijuana for medical purposes. Gov. Charlie Baker, Attorney General Maura Healey, House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Boston Mayor Marty Walsh are among the officials who have joined the campaign opposing Question 4.