Emily Harris

Four months after U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions renewed the federal government’s pursuit of mandatory minimum drug sentences for low-level drug crimes in federal cases, California lawmakers on Sept. 12 approved a bill to rein in this type of wasteful, ineffective and extreme drug war policy was at the state level.

With a 41 to 25 vote, the California Assembly approved Senate Bill 180, also known as the Repeal Ineffective Sentencing Enhancements Act (RISE Act). The governor signed the bill into law in Oct.

“Sentencing enhancements break up families and don’t make our communities any safer”

The RISE Act, authored by Senator Holly Mitchell (D-Los Angeles) and Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Long Beach), repeals California’s three-year sentence enhancement for prior drug convictions. Previously the base sentence for a person possessing drugs for sale was two to four years in jail. However, if that person has two prior convictions for possession for sale, they would face an additional six years in jails, for a total of 10 years.

“Tennessee is 17.1 percent Black, but Blacks make up 69 percent of all drug-free school zone offenders…” REASON Magazine, January 2018

“By enacting smart and effective legislation like the RISE Act, California has the opportunity to be a leader for the rest of the country in drug sentencing reform,” said Zachary Norris, the executive director of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. “The RISE Act would free up taxpayer dollars for investment in community-based programs and services that improve public safety like mental health and substance use treatment.”

The RISE Act restores balance in the judicial process, address extreme sentences, and reduce racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Although rates of drug use and sales are comparable across racial lines, people of color are far more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested, prosecuted, convicted and incarcerated for drug law violations than are Whites.

Sentencing enhancements were meant to reduce the availability of drugs and deter drug selling. However, like most other drug war policies, they are a proven and costly failure. In addition to depleting state and county funds that could be spent on schools, health and social services, sentencing enhancements are a major contributor to jail overcrowding. As of 2016, there were more than 1,500 people in California jails sentenced to more than five years and the leading cause of these long sentences was non-violent drug sale offenses.

“Sentencing enhancements break up families and don’t make our communities any safer,” said Sandra Johnson, a policy fellow with Legal Services for Prisoners with Children. “These extreme sentences have a disproportionate impact on the most vulnerable populations — Black and Brown people who have mental health issues, who struggle with addiction and who are homeless.”

As Attorney General Jeff Sessions continues to advance failed Drug War policies and extreme sentencing policies, advocates applaud the passage of SB 180 and see the law as an opportunity for California to demonstrate its commitment to criminal justice policies that prioritize safety instead of punishment.

FAMM supports resentencing

Legislation that limits the use of solitary confinement at state and county juvenile correctional facilities was passed by the California Senate. It is now before the State Assembly.
Senate Bill 124, authored by Sen. Mark Leno, creates statewide standards that encourage the use of less damaging and more effective disciplinary actions. The bill is similar to a settlement recently reached between Contra Costa County and disability rights advocates following allegations of solitary confinement abuses of special needs youth in that county’s juvenile hall.
“Solitary confinement is an extraordinarily harmful disciplinary measure that has no rehabilitative purpose whatsoever,” said Sen. Leno, D-San Francisco. “It is inhumane to lock up young people in this way and deprive them of human contact, education, exercise and fresh air. This type of isolation is widely condemned and only exacerbates the problems troubled youth face. We must provide them with treatment, not prolonged isolation, if we want them to become future productive members of our communities.”
SB 124 defines solitary confinement and permits its use in juvenile correctional centers only when a person poses an immediate and substantial risk of harming others or threatening the security of the facility. The bill is co-sponsored by the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, California Public Defenders Association, Youth Justice Coalition and Children’s Defense Fund-California. It is also supported by the Alameda and Los Angeles County Boards of Supervisors and a large network of civil rights organizations, health and social workers, churches and legal justice groups.
“The Senate’s passage of SB 124 brings us one step closer to ending the solitary confinement of youth, a damaging practice that has been shown to cause irreparable harm,” said Jennifer Kim, director of programs for the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. “In order to heal, youth need to receive proper treatment and be connected to their families and communities.”
A 2009 national survey connects the use of solitary confinement to suicide. About half of young people in the juvenile justice system who committed suicide were isolated and alone when they died. In addition, more than 10 percent of young people in juvenile facilities who committed suicide had been in solitary confinement in the past.
“Experts agree that the practice of placing youth in solitary confinement can have lifelong negative psychological consequences because of their unique developmental needs,” said Martin Schwarz, a California Public Defenders Association board member. “With this bill, California joins a growing number of states who have restricted or abolished solitary confinement for children.”
“We applaud members of the Senate for their leadership in voting for SB 124 to protect our incarcerated youth from the trauma of solitary confinement,” said Alex M. Johnson, executive director of the Children’s Defense Fund-California. “SB 124 is a critical step toward ending the punitive incarceration model in juvenile justice facilities across the state.”
According to the Los Angeles Times, 19 states ban solitary confinement for punitive reasons. Most recently, New York City banned the use of solitary confinement of youth 21 and younger.
“California uses harsh, and often long-term solitary confinement in both its youth and adult institutions,” said Kim McGill, an organizer with the Youth Justice Coalition who has also experienced solitary confinement. “These practices are outdated and debilitating to a person’s physical, emotional and mental well-being.”
SB 124 is scheduled to be heard in Assembly policy committees this summer.
“While California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) cannot comment on pending legislation, it is incorrect to refer to Security Housing Units (SHU) as solitary,” reports the CDCR press office. “There is no ‘solitary confinement’ in California prisons and the SHU is not solitary confinement. Many inmates in SHU have cellmates.”
Visit www.stopsolitaryforkids.org or #stopsolitaryforkids for more information.

Governor signs drug sentencing reform bill SB 180

Senate Pushes Bill 124 to Reduce Juvenile Solitary Confinement