Judges fighting backs against Ashcroft

[dwckabal]

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A debate over appropriate punishments for federal crimes and how cases should be pursued by prosecutors has made unlikely foes of conservative judges and Attorney General John Ashcroft.

<--snip-->

Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, a moderate conservative named to the bench by Reagan, told lawyers in August that mandatory minimum sentences should be abolished and the guidelines should be revised downward.

"Our resources are misspent, our punishments too severe, our sentences too long," Kennedy said.

Kennedy's comments to the American Bar Association have spurred the nation's largest lawyers group to start its own strategy for changes. A commission will be formed in Kennedy's name and hopes to have recommendations by next summer.

<--snip-->

I say it's about f*cking time. Mandatory minimums have done nothing to deter crime and everything to fill up our prisons with people who don't deserve to be there.

EDIT: http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/09/30/judges.ashcroft.ap/index.html

[izzie]

1. I am with you on this.

n/t

[jody]

2. But gun-control proponents and pro-RKBA proponents support

more aggressive enforcement of existing gun laws. That can only mean more arrests, more prosecutions, and harsher sentences and that's what Asscroft has proposed.

It looks like gun-control activists and pro-RKBA activists have finally found an issue on which they can agree. The sad thing is it means supporting a decision made by Asscroft. I assume Scary Brady and Diane Fiendstein will also support Asscroft.

A bitter pill to swallow, but it's a chance to see if more aggressive enforcement of gun laws will reduce violent crime. If it doesn't work, then it seems unlikely that more laws would do any better.