• 0 Posts
  • 413 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 4th, 2023

help-circle
  • He is responsible for a lot of policies that resulted in the mass incarceration we have today.


    Biden works with far-right Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond and the Reagan Administration to pass the Comprehensive Control Act. The law expands federal drug trafficking penalties and civil asset forfeiture, allowing police to seize a person’s property without proving them guilty of a crime. Two years later, Biden co-sponsors the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, which creates new mandatory minimum sentences for drugs, including the notorious 100:1 sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. A conviction of possession of powder cocaine with intent to distribute carries a five-year sentence for 500 grams, while the same conviction for crack carries a five-year sentence for only 5 grams, so the harshest penalties are enacted on low-level drug sellers and impoverished drug users.


    The controversial legislation known as the 1994 Crime Bill is Biden’s most significant contribution to the expansion of policing the drug war. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, written by Biden, increases funds for police and prisons, fueling an expansion of the federal prison population. It also newly applies the federal death penalty to 60 crimes, including large-scale drug trafficking and drive-by-shootings resulting in death. Biden brags after the law passes that “the liberal wing of the Democratic Party” is now for “60 new death penalties,” “70 enhanced penalties,” “100,000 cops,” and “125,000 new state prison cells.”

    https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/biden-pardon-weed-offenders-timeline-1234606962/



















  • It is a little complicated:

    Before proceeding further, the Court notes the limited scope of this case, this opinion, and the relief granted. This case does not involve creating a count of the representatives’ locations or second-guessing the House’s own count and listing of its members. Instead, the Court takes as true the House’s recitation of its proceedings and its designation of certain members as participating by proxy. Further, the Court makes no judgment on the wisdom of the House’s proxy rule, only its constitutionality as it pertains to counting absent members as part of the quorum. Nor does the Court address whether some members may permissibly vote by proxy if the constitutionally required quorum is otherwise physically present at the time of the vote. Finally, although the Court finds that the passage of the Consolidated Appropriations Act violated the Constitution, Texas does not seek an injunction of—and the Court does not enjoin—the entire Act. Rather, the Court enjoins only the application of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act against Texas. The relief granted here is limited to abating the injury that Texas has proven will occur.

    https://www.scribd.com/document/709363863/State-of-Texas-v-Merrick-Garland-Et-Al