Navigation
About This Blog

Judging Crimes is a blog about criminal law, violent crime and the judiciary, dedicated to making the liberal case for greater democratic control of the criminal justice system.  It's a "view from the trenches" because it's written by a practitioner, not an academic or journalist.  It examines the changing role of the judiciary in American society by looking at what judges actually do, rather than what they say.  I know what they do because I deal with the consequences every day. 

Opinions issued by judges, from Supreme Court justices on down, are justifications for the exercise of governmental power.  But it is the exercise of power itself that should command our attention, not the justifications.  Judging Crimes is concerned with the reality of judicial power rather than the verbal formulas used to defend it. 

American law professors have long liked to say they teach their students "to think like a lawyer."  Learning to think that way is a matter of internalizing certain assumptions.  The practice of judging is likewise based on a foundation of shared assumptions, among them that the United States Constitution -- a document of 8,335 words, the length of a book chapter -- provides an answer to every question.  Rather like a Ouija board.

These assumptions are so ingrained -- and their internalization is so necessary to the successful practice of law -- that most people who subscribe to them aren't even aware of having done so.  Judging Crimes will try to engage not just with the expressions of judicial power, but with the assumptions on which those expressions  rest.  

Judging Crimes won't be filled with daily entries commenting on the day's events or provide a best-of-the-web welter of links.  Many other blogs already do that, far better than I could hope to do.  (Check out these.)  Instead, Judging Crimes will contain pieces of a length that might seem long for a blog but would be short in a serious magazine.  I hope to post new pieces several times a week.

Powered by Squarespace
Fan!

Become a Facebook fan to be notified of mini-blog entries and new posts and columns.

In Our Name
Test Drive the Book!
« 39. Alito the Beaver | Main | 37. Call your important witnesses before lunch »
Wednesday
04Jan2006

38. Perseveration in the "War on Drugs"

A few days ago, BlackProf ran a piece about the disenfranchisement of felons, reporting that a full 25% of black men in Virginia are ineligible to vote because of their records.  In Arizona,  "soldiers and law officers lined up to accept bribes from what they believed were representatives of Mexican cocaine cartels," according to the Arizona Republic.  Bolivia elected a former coca grower as president, while Colombia remains mired in a civil war financed by cocaine.  In my hometown of Albuquerque, Presiding Judge John Brennan pled guilty to cocaine possession.

While the conservative Heritage Foundation floods the Internet with research (or, at least, talking points) about using governmental authority to keep families intact, the Republican Party's 2004 platform advocated prison time for drug users (page 73), tearing families apart in the most literal way imaginable.   The vast increase in America's corrections population since Ronald Reagan took office has helped to normalize prison for millions of children, presumably not the intent of Nancy Reagon's "Just Say No" campaign.  Growing up with an addicted parent is a terrible misery.  But can anyone believe that it's a improvement to grow up with a parent who is not only addicted but in and out of jail?

The costs of the war on drugs include dirty judges (and what cheaper insurance could a drug dealer purchase than a judge?), wars and social breakdown in South America, destroyed families in America, the formal expelling of hundreds of thousands of adults from our political life, and of course the expenditure of billions of dollars.  (For a more vivid sense of how many dollars all those zeroes represent, check out this War on Drugs Clock.)

And the benefits are ...?  Go back to that Republican Party platform and you'll read about the destructive effects of drug use.  The points are all valid, but how are they addressed by the proposed solutions?  How can anyone convince him- or herself that a program in use since Nixon's formation of the DEA is finally going to start working tomorrow?  Mental health professionals have a word to explain it: perseveration.

AuthorJoel Jacobsen | Comment1 Comment | | |
DateWednesday, January 4, 2006 at 08:03PM in

Reader Comments (1)

I find your site fascinating.

Very informative.
January 5, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterJohn

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.