(ThyBlackMan.com) President Barack Obama’s ascendance to the oval office was worth a fraction of the importance which has been claimed, the president would do something to stop the human catastrophe of mass incarceration and the destruction it has wrought on black Americans. Instead he has officially given it his blessing. In a stunning decision, the Obama administration has made it quite clear where it stands. It stands with making certain that the president spends his two terms in office pleasing white people at the expense of black people.
Mass incarceration was the mechanism used to put black people back in their place after the civil rights movement. It was a perfect means of turning back the clock and diminishing or destroying the citizenship rights which were won after years of struggle. The war on drugs was the pretext for carrying out this plan and the hysteria fomented against crack cocaine created popular demand for draconian law enforcement measures. The United States then became the imprisonment capital of the world with black people paying a disproportionate price.
Under the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, the federal government officially established that one form of a drug would by statute be treated with greater severity than another form, a 100:1 degree of severity. For sentencing purposes, one gram of crack cocaine was treated like 100 grams of powdered cocaine and thereby established harsh mandatory minimum sentences in federal courts.
Those disparities were opposed from the very beginning by astute lawyers, civil libertarians and anyone savvy about the role that the criminal justice system has always played in imposing the harshest treatments on black people. Years of agitation brought relief in 2010 when Congress passed and President Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act. The sentencing disparity didn’t end however, it was merely reduced. The ratio went from 100:1 to 18:1. The legislation should have been called the Not Quite So Unfair Sentencing Act.
The 100:1 disparity existed for some 20 years before it was addressed and didn’t undo the damage of two decades. What would happen to those who were sentenced between 1986 and 2010? According to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, those persons ought to have the opportunity for retroactive redress. This court noted that between 1988 and 1995 in seventeen states which included large cities such as Boston, Denver, Miami, Chicago, Los Angeles and Dallas, not one white person was tried under federal regulations for a crack cocaine related offense. In US v Blewett it ruled that the Fair Sentencing Act “should apply to all defendants, including those sentenced prior to its passage.” The court’s decision sounds reasonable and fair, but not to the Obama justice department, which is seeking to overturn the ruling. In other words, the Obama administration is leaving 5,000 people in jail who have no reason to be there and they are doing it for the most cynical of motives.
The Obama apologists have ready-made excuses for any and all acts of evil-doing perpetrated by this administration. One of the favorite enabler rationales is that he isn’t just the president for black people, but for everyone. True, but he seems to never be the president for black people. We have no political victories to point to, no reason for happiness except outdated notions of race pride.
It is clear that President Obama has chosen to side with white America against black America. There is no other explanation. He is a lame duck and no longer has to worry about re-election. He had a court decision which he could support and which gave him an easy out.
But there is no easy out when it comes to black people, criminal justice issues and the Obama administration. It seems that the protest slogans are true. We are all Trayvon Martin and must be prepared to face attack and even death and have no expectation of redress from the federal government. We are all Bradley Manning and must be willing to risk being hit with the sledge hammer of federal prosecution for any offense.
We are still being told that the term limited president can’t risk being identified with his most loyal supporters. White people must win, black people must lose and black people should just keep quiet about it all.
Of course the president notoriously parsimonious with pardons and commutations could change this situation with the stroke of a pen. He could commute the sentences of the 5,000 people still in federal prisons who were sentenced under the old rules. That will never happen and the unlucky people sentenced just weeks before the 2010 act was signed, are just victims of a “cosmic roll of the dice.”
The hollowness of President Obama mania has never been more clear cut than in this instance. When he first campaigned for the presidency in 2008 detractors were urged to be quiet and let him win because his feet could be held to the fire. No such flames were ever lit, and the Obamaphiles maligned anyone who didn’t go along with their cultish fixation.
The constitutional law professor president doesn’t care much about the constitution nor does the technically black man care about black people. The president is just the latest ambitious man who was able to make the right sales pitch to the right people and ended up becoming president as a result. There certainly isn’t any change for the people he could help but has chosen not to.
Written By Margaret Kimberley
Official website; http://freedomrider.blogspot.com
It sounds more like, Obama Fights To Keep Criminals In Jail.” The fact that they’re black isn’t the issue. Blacks who have no respect for the law find pleasure going back and forth behind bars. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t keep committing crimes. Its a vacation for them not having to be a member of society where you’re expected to rise higher than the low life criminal status. Since most crack dealers and crack addicts are repeat offenders, its not the US gov’t’s fault that they repeatedly commit illegal drug offenses.
@Bella…”There will always be a White America vs./and Black America with any President thats in office.” This is a very true statement. I used both the “vs.” and the “and.” The vs. signifies that there’s always gonna be whites and blacks at war for whatever reason. The “and” mean there will be two different neighborhoods/communities that exist in this world. However, I also recognize that not all blacks and whites are at war with each other.
THIS could not be a clearer demonstration of who and what OBAMA actually is OBAMA is a corporate/banker president.
PRISONS are huge business that is increasingly being privatized and prison labor profits are going through the roof for OBAMA to release these thousands of men he would be releasing millions of dollars in revenue of his corporate/banker donors.
WE made a big mistake by personalizing OBAMA we made him our brother/father /uncle and fell in love with him and you never do that to any politician.
THIS man is just another criminal AMERICAN president and the sooner we get off this OBAMA Disneyland ride the sooner we can finally develop real black leadership that will address the interest of our people.
It’s Ashame We As A People Are In This Fix!
I read about this in another article – the other article was not specific to the number of African Americans who could receive their freedom. It was hard to believe when I read it. Why would any president, not just Obama not free folks sentenced under what was admittedly a “bad law?” The fact that Congress felt it was necessary to redo the law speaks volumes about its unfaireness. Your facts reflect what was in the other article regarding the actions of the Obama justice department. For those who refuse to face the truth of this Administration’s actions, I have copied and pasted what that article stated, because it actually names name and gives case law.
“The Obama administration failed to take an innovative, aggressive, justice-seeking lead, either in putting forth the initial provisions of what eventually became the so-called Fair Sentencing Act, or negotiating its provisions in Congress before its eventual passage. With the administration doing all it could to avoid public identification with the measure, Congressional advocates were only able or willing to narrow the gap between crack and powdered cocaine possession penalties from 100 to 1 down to 18 to 1, even though the president’s party had a whopping majority in the House and a much thinner margin in the Senate. It wasn’t actually a great victory, but the White House was quick to take credit for it, and signed the measure into law in August of 2010.
The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 did not specify whether its reduction should apply retroactively to all those currently serving time for crack cocaine convictions, whether or not it applied to state or only federal prisoners, or just those sentenced since its passage, or even the exact date its provisions should begin to be enforced at all. The Obama administration not only failed to take advantage of its mandate to pursue justice for tens of thousands of families whose loved ones and potential caregivers and breadwinners were serving unjust and disproportionate sentences – it sent Eric Holder’s Justice Department into court to argue against retroactivity, against the reduction of sentences for inmates tried or sentenced since the law was passed, against its being applied to state prisoners, For all practical purposes, as Professor Douglas A. Berman of Ohio State University pointed out in October 2010,
“…President Obama’s Department of Justice has adopted the advocacy policy that the unfair and now reformed old crack sentencing statute should and must be applied for as long as possible to as many defendants as possible…”
For more than eleven months AFTER the passage of the so-called Fair Sentencing Act, the Obama Department of Justice went into courts again and again seeking to retain and expand the regime of mass incarceration, despite a torrent of appeals from advocacy organizations and the families of inmates across the country. Finally in July 2011, the Justice Department issued a memo to prosecutors declaring that only offenses committed after the August 3, 2010 signing date of the Fair Sentencing Act were eligible for sentencing reduction under its provisions.
Even the US Supreme Court told the Obama administration it was obligated to begin enforcement of the Fair Sentencing Act. But as the defense attorney Alec Karakatsanis put it in the Guardian (UK) last week,
“…the US supreme court held last year that the new, more “fair” sentences must be applied to those not yet sentenced.
But that case did not decide the fate of any of the thousands of people already sitting in prison because of what all agree is an unfair law. For those people – sentenced, in some cases, just days or weeks before the Fair Sentencing Act was signed – our society’s acknowledgment that they remain in prison for no good reason may not help them at all – because the government did not care to reduce their penalties retroactively when it declared them unjust.
For several years, federal judges have done nothing to remedy this injustice; one famously concluded that the prisoners sentenced under the old law had simply “lost on a temporal roll of the cosmic dice”. So, there are American citizens serving tens of thousands of years in prison because, according to all three branches of government, it’s just their tough luck?
Apparently so, until two months ago. On 17 May 2013, the US court of appeals for the sixth circuit held that the new, “fair” sentences must be applied to all those previously sentenced under laws that everyone acknowledges were discriminatory. The two-judge majority opinion wrote forcefully (pdf) and with unusual candor about the history of unequal treatment under the old laws. The judges ordered that those sentenced under those laws were entitled to ask federal judges to reduce their sentences…”
True to form, the Obama administration has already gone back to court to argue that the 6th Circuit was misguided in its directive to apply the Fair Sentencing Act. Ominously the White House is on track to appeal the 6th Circuit’s enforcement directive to the Supreme Court on technical grounds, which will likely rule that discriminatory impact is somehow NOT invidious and deliberate racial discrimination requiring any enforcement of any particular law. In other words, President Obama and Attorney General Holder, the most powerful pair of black officials in the country, are prepared keep tens of thousands of the prison state’s victims under hatches indefinitely. No matter their patter about how they were profiled back in the day. Their actions, not our expectations, and not their words, are who they are in the here and now.” by Bruce Dixon of Black Agenda Report.
http://www.sslumpsum.com
I just saw this documentary last night. I challenge all my brothers and sisters to watch it, and you all have a great weekend. “Runaway Slave”
http://www.youtube.com/user/runawayslavemovie
President Obama’s endorsement??? This sounds absurd and out of character. Ia m inclined to believe that my president isn’t out of touch with reality. The criminal justice system is no strange place to the President of the United States. President Obama is knowledgeable and well informed as it concerns the injustices African Americans are subjected to and must endure. Sometimes I think you people are stupid, heartless, savage, and downright ugly bigots. What honorable President would wish and or mandate this sort of slavery?
TO all the OBAMA supporters I understand the truth hurts but it will also make you FREE!.
THE website the BLAZE reported on 3/14/13 [OBAMA ADMINISTRATION ADMITS RELEASING THOUSNDS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS INCLUDING DRUNK DRIVERS]
{AFTER weeks of denial the OBAMA administration acknowledged Thursday that it had in fact released more than 2;ooo illegal immigrants from immigration jails due to budget concerns during three weeks in FEBUARY four of the most serious offenders [sexual] have been put back in detention.
THE AP citing internal budget documents reported exclusively that the administration had released more than 2;000 illegal immigrants since at least 2/15/13 and planned to release 3;000 more in MARCH}.
AND the first black president with the first black attorney general is fighting to keep our people in jail can anyone explain this.
I thought this article was very one dimensional. It seemed like it was coming from a really hateful place. I think President Obama is doing the best he can with what people that turn down his every move. He’s not fighting for black people to stay in jail. Blacks are they only people who allow themselves to end up in jail. if we would all just come to together and uplift each other instead of downgrading ourselves the outcome of this mess would be far better than what it is now. There will always be a WHITE AMERICA vs BLACK AMERICA, and that will be with any PRESIDENT that comes into office.
How does one reduce substantive criticism of the president to “hate” rooted in a “mind set” equivalent to that of…black on black crime?
I LOVE our president, but come on now!
Everytime I read something from this publication, I see a sense of real hate about the President I rarely if ever read something positive. The general mind set always seems to be the same as I would expect from White America. That’s sad. It’s this same mind set why we have black on black crime. I really see no difference.