Supreme Court Ruling Says Those Sentenced After Crack/Powder Disparity Reduced Should Benefit from the New Law
KultureKritic.com Staff writer
The Supreme Court ruled this week that those who committed crack cocaine offenses before new laws came into effect should receive sentences that benefit from the new rules, not the old ones. The case ruled in favor of Corey A. Hill and Edward Dorsey, two men who were convicted of selling crack in 2007 and 2008. Both of them received mandatory 10-year sentences in the state of Illinois but were sentenced after the the Fair Sentencing Act went into effect in 2010.
The Fair Sentencing Act reduces the disparity between sentences for crack and powder cocaine. Justice Stephen Breyer said that the new law should have been used in the sentencing for the two men. The ruling was 5 – 4.
“Finally, we can find no convincing reason why Congress would have wanted these unfair consequences,” Breyer wrote.
Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments
Clarence Thomas voted against the ruling,not surprised.
Remember this 5-4 ruling when the High Court overturns the health care mandate this week.
They always know who uncle Tom is and how much it cost to buy him.What a price some blacks pay to belong!!