Those privileged to serve as President and in senior roles in the executive branch have an obligation to use that influence to enhance the fairness and effectiveness of the justice system at all phases. How we treat citizens who make mistakes even serious mistakes , pay their debt to society, and deserve a second chance reflects who we are as a people and reveals a lot about our character and commitment to our founding principles. And how we police our communities and the kinds of problems we ask our criminal justice system to solve can have a profound impact on the extent of trust in law enforcement and significant implications for public safety.
Criminal justice reform has been a focus of my entire career — even since before my time at the Harvard Law Review.
As a community organizer, I saw firsthand how our criminal justice system exacerbates inequality. It takes young people who made mistakes no worse than my own and traps them in an endless cycle of marginalization and punishment. I have tried to bring that case directly to the American people in a number of unprecedented ways. And I signed sentencing reform legislation and met with members of Congress from both parties who share my belief that criminal justice reform is a priority. Thanks to the dedicated efforts of so many in my Administration, the bipartisan push for reform from federal, state, and local officials, and the work of so many committed citizens outside government, America has made important strides.
We have reduced overlong sentences for offenders and re————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— 10 See, e. POST Dec. In addition to signing the Fair Sentencing Act of , Pub.
Instead, we have public servants — police officers. We have made progress in helping people, especially young people, avoid getting entangled in the justice system in the first place. This Commentary talks about those achievements — and the tools Presidents can use to effect meaningful change throughout the system.
And it emphasizes the continuing historic opportunity to make further progress. Part I details the current criminal justice landscape and emphasizes the urgent need for reform. It would be a tragic mistake to treat criminal justice reform as an agenda limited to certain communities. All Americans have an interest in living in safe and vibrant neighborhoods, in raising their children in a country of equal treatment and second chances, and in entrusting their liberty to a justice system that remains true to our highest ideals.
Part II shows how the President can drive significant reform at the federal level. Working with Congress, my Administration helped secure bipartisan sentencing reform legislation reducing the crack-topowder-cocaine disparity. And through the presidential pardon power, I have commuted the sentences of more than prisoners. Even though there are important structural and prudential constraints on how the President can directly influence criminal enforcement, these changes illustrate that presidential administrations can and do shape the direction of the federal criminal justice system in lasting and profound ways.
But Who Is Listening? Part IV highlights some of the work that remains, focusing on reforms that are supported by broad consensus and could be completed in the near term. These include passing bipartisan criminal justice reform legislation in Congress, adopting commonsense measures to keep firearms out of the hands of those who are a threat to others or themselves, finding better ways to address the tragic opioid epidemic in this country, implementing critical reforms to forensic science, improving criminal justice data, and using technology to enhance trust in and the effectiveness of law enforcement.
In , there were less than half a million inmates in U. But too many, especially nonviolent drug offenders, serve unnecessarily long sentences. This ranking excludes territories and countries with populations of less than , This comes with significant public safety consequences because the growing [Bureau of Prisons BOP ] budget is crowding out everything else we do at the department.
Total expenditures on incarceration, moreover, only begin to capture the true costs of our flawed approach to criminal justice.
The Five Hardest Lessons of the O. Warren, Elizabeth Fall The noncitizen parent exists between two often-conflicting legal identities: that of an immigrant and that of a parent. The widespread use of SaaS applications like Slack has shifted how work is performed in the digital age, with attendant implications for labor law applicability. Carolina Academic Press Because I have spent thirty years as a practicing environmental litigator sometimes acting for plaintiffs, sometimes for defendants prior to entering academia, my head swims with the challenges such a case would pose.
An estimated seventy million Americans — roughly a third of the adult population — have some type of criminal record, which can trigger a whole host of stigmas and restrictions, including barriers to employment, voting, education, housing, and public benefits. And in too many communities — especially communities of color and those struggling with poverty and addiction — the justice system has touched almost every family.
The costs of maintaining this system are nothing short of breathtaking. We sacrifice billions of taxpayer dollars and waste untold human capital on a system that shuffles too many young people into a pipeline from underfunded schools to overcrowded jails. The policies of the s and s occurred against a backdrop of criminal activity that was ravaging our communities, especially our poor neighborhoods and communities of color. The FBI calculates that the rate of violent crime was See FBI, U.
Republicans embraced the strategy first, but Democrats quickly followed. See U. Shannon et al. By reducing sentences and reinvesting some of the savings in other public safety initiatives — especially programs that actually address substance abuse and support for those with mental illness — these states have improved outcomes, enhanced trust, and thus ultimately made better use of taxpayer dollars.
See Sally Q. Alabama has had a similar experience. The goal of JRI is to generate state savings that can be reinvested in evidence-based strategies that will increase public safety while holding offenders accountable for crimes. Through my own actions and the policies of my Administration, I supported evidence-based solutions to these longstanding problems.
A number of Republicans have been vocal and sincere advocates for reform efforts even as they were otherwise frequent critics of my Administration. But because the current system reflects years of changes and policy developments, I am also clear-eyed about the fact that change will likely happen gradually, with an emphasis on evidence-based reforms and incremental approaches that enjoy broad support.
There are also a host of Left-Right coalitions in this space. Governor Nathan Deal of Georgia, a state that has led on these issues, spoke at the event about the impact drug courts can have on the lives of those struggling with addiction and seeking to earn their second chance. We will lose the public if we try to do everything at once without having data and evidence. If, on the other hand, we do it systematically, methodically,.
Nowhere are these limits more important than in the administration of the criminal law. For good reason, particular criminal matters are not directed by the President personally but are handled by career prosecutors and law enforcement officials who are dedicated to serving the public and promoting public safety.
To avoid even the appearance of politicization, a series of internal White House rules and prudential practices sharply restrict contact with the Department of Justice and other enforcement agencies on specific matters. Nevertheless, there is still much that Presidents can do to make the justice system better serve the public.
Sentencing Commission, my Administration has made reforms to federal charging and sentencing practices. These reforms have allowed us to use our federal criminal laws wisely, reduce excessive sentences, and better ensure that the punishment fits the crime.
I have also used my clemency power to a degree unmatched in modern history50 to address unfairness in the federal system. These changes mean that I will be the first President in decades to leave office with a federal prison population lower than when I took office51 even as my Administration saw the rate of violent crime fall to its lowest point in decades. While the most recent FBI Uniform Crime Report UCR data suggests that crime increased overall in , it is important to remember that still represented the third-lowest year for violent crime in the past two decades. In many respects, the most consequential actions I took in this area were my decisions to entrust these dedicated public servants and other senior officials in the Department of Justice with the authority to use their discretion wisely and to provide guidance and set an example for the thousands of federal prosecutors across the United States.
See, e. In some cases, satisfaction of the. In , we saw the first reduction in the federal prison population in thirty-three years,61 a trend that has continued in the years since. Sentencing Reform Legislation. Affairs, U. The U. Sentencing Commission to do the same. One promising proposal in my second term was the Smarter Sentencing Act,68 an ambitious bipartisan bill that advanced out of the Judiciary Committee by a significant margin. I met several times at the White House with Democrats and Republicans from the House and the Senate who are dedicated to these issues.
The culmination of these efforts ————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————— 66 67 Id. Richard J. Durbin, Chairman, S. S—80 daily ed. Grassley ; CONG. S—50 daily ed. July 14, statement of Sen. This work or parts of it may not be reproduced, copied or transmitted except as permitted by sections and of the U. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press , by any means including voice recordings and the copying of its digital form, without the written permission of the print publisher. Available in major digital formats and at leading ebook retailers and booksellers.
Blue Mountain School District , F. Gupta , F. Federal Statutes — Westfall Act — D. Circuit Holds that U. Rumsfeld , F. SEC , F. Garthus , F. Molignaro , F. Review of David E. Periodicals postage paid at Boston, Mass. Remittance must be made by U.
Dollar Draft payable at a United States bank. Subscription requests that are received midvolume may be subject to an additional postage and handling charge. Domestic claims of nonreceipt of issues should be made within 90 days of the month of publication, overseas claims within days; thereafter, the regular back issue rate will be charged for replacement.
All notifications of changes of address should include old and new addresses, with ZIP codes.
Please inform us one month in advance to ensure prompt delivery. Back issues and volumes prior to Volume are available from William S. For the prices of issues, volumes, and sets prior to Volume , please inquire of William S. The Review invites the submission of unsolicited manuscripts. The Review will give preference to articles under 50 law review pages in length — the equivalent of about 25, words including text and footnotes. The Review will not publish articles exceeding 60 law review pages — the equivalent of about 30, words — except in extraordinary circumstances.
Review of manuscripts may take from four to six weeks. Authors who are considering concurrent submissions to other journals should be aware that the Review cannot guarantee timely responses to requests for expedited review. It is easy to write a tribute to Frank Michelman. It is extremely difficult to write a tribute to Frank Michelman.
It is easy because superlatives flow readily and appropriately. It is difficult because, if judged by the standards Frank applies to his own work, whatever one writes is bound to fall short. He had been given tenure relatively recently and was already recognized as a rising star. Shortly before the fall term began, then-Dean Derek Bok gathered the faculty at a resort in the Berkshires to talk about the issues that might come up during a year that all expected would be marked by University-wide unrest.
It was an odd event; I had not expected my Harvard visit to begin by being made to play volleyball with Louis Loss, the great securities scholar and perhaps the only Yale Law School graduate then on the Harvard Law faculty. The meetings and the topics discussed were, on the whole, tedious though probably necessary. He showed even then what a university citizen is and should be.
At the end of the fall term, we got teaching evaluations from the students. I was pleased with mine, and said so to Frank while asking him how he had done. He gave me his to read, and they were splendid.
He was referring to the inevitable two or three whom he had not been able to inspire. But he would have none of it. It was his responsibility to connect with every single student. He understood, from the start, what a true teacher should strive for. And then there was his review article of my first book, The Costs of Accidents.
Other reviewers, though perhaps respectful, did not fully understand it. Some, like Richard Posner, ultimately did. But in he began his review with a celebrated and, in retrospect from him, a quite laughable sentence. Torts is not my field. Frank, instead, got what I was trying to do right from the start, and immediately pushed the quest further.
I mention his great influence on me, though, not out of Guido-centeredness, nor even out of respect for his friendship to me. I note it, rather, as an example, because his unfailing insights have been at the core of any number of similar exchanges with other scholars, and of analogous developments in all of his fields of work: legal theory, constitutional law, and property.
In each of these his contributions have particular characteristics. They always understand the whole field and are respectful of what other people are trying to do, no matter how critical of their positions he may be. They are willing to use other disciplines, whether economics, philosophy, or whatever, with great skill while never becoming slave to them or to their often unfortunate self-imposed limits. They are truly original in the sense that they not only advance the field but also add something that will survive all of us.
And they are stated in a way that may seem humble, because it bespeaks an ever-present generosity of spirit, but is actually, and at the same time, devastatingly powerful. In short, Frank is, if possible, an even greater scholar than he is a citizen and teacher. Student contributions explore the law relating to antitrust and business deception; the failed Google Books settlement; mergers and acquisitions; materiality in securities law; administrative law; patentable subject matter; and paid sick leave.
Finally, the issue includes two Book Notes.
The Harvard Law Review is offered in a digital edition for ereaders, featuring active Table of Contents, linked footnotes and cross-references, active URLs. Read "Harvard Law Review: Volume , Number 4 - February " by Harvard Law Review available from Rakuten Kobo. Sign up today.
The Harvard Law Review is a student-run organization whose primary purpose is to publish a journal of legal scholarship. The Review comes out monthly from November through June and has roughly pages per volume.