What's going on in the District? Any trials? Or is most of Miami is in Aspen this week for spring break?
The NY Times
has an op-ed saying that everyone should push for trial and that would crash the system.
But in this era of mass incarceration — when our nation’s prison
population has quintupled in a few decades partly as a result of the war
on drugs and the “get tough” movement — these rights are, for the
overwhelming majority of people hauled into courtrooms across America,
theoretical. More than 90 percent of criminal cases are never tried
before a jury. Most people charged with crimes forfeit their
constitutional rights and plead guilty.
“The truth is that government officials have deliberately engineered the
system to assure that the jury trial system established by the
Constitution is seldom used,” said Timothy Lynch, director of the
criminal justice project at the libertarian Cato Institute. In other
words: the system is rigged.
In the race to incarcerate, politicians champion stiff sentences for
nearly all crimes, including harsh mandatory minimum sentences and
three-strikes laws; the result is a dramatic power shift, from judges to
prosecutors.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1978 that threatening someone with life
imprisonment for a minor crime in an effort to induce him to forfeit a
jury trial did not violate his Sixth Amendment right to trial. Thirteen
years later, in Harmelin v. Michigan, the court ruled that life
imprisonment for a first-time drug offense did not violate the Eighth
Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
***
On the phone, Susan said she knew exactly what was involved in asking
people who have been charged with crimes to reject plea bargains, and
press for trial. “Believe me, I know. I’m asking what we can do. Can we crash the system just by exercising our rights?”
The answer is yes. The system of mass incarceration depends almost
entirely on the cooperation of those it seeks to control. If everyone
charged with crimes suddenly exercised his constitutional rights, there
would not be enough judges, lawyers or prison cells to deal with the
ensuing tsunami of litigation. Not everyone would have to join for the
revolt to have an impact; as the legal scholar
Angela J. Davis
noted, “if the number of people exercising their trial rights suddenly
doubled or tripled in some jurisdictions, it would create chaos.”
Such chaos would force mass incarceration to the top of the agenda for
politicians and policy makers, leaving them only two viable options:
sharply scale back the number of criminal cases filed (for drug
possession, for example) or amend the Constitution (or eviscerate it by
judicial “emergency” fiat). Either action would create a crisis and the
system would crash — it could no longer function as it had before. Mass
protest would force a public conversation that, to date, we have been
content to avoid.
This has been talked about for quite some time, but no one ever has the guts to do it.... It would be interesting...