Courtesy Kevork Djansezian/Getty Images By Permission
|
Can they stay with you?
A bitterly divided Supreme Court today upheld a lower court ruling that California must reduce its prison population by at least 30,000 to alleviate overcrowding.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by the four liberal members of the court, acknowledged that the order is “unprecedented” in its “sweep and extent” but said that the crowded conditions amounted to violations of prisoners’ constitutional rights against cruel and unusual treatment and must be remedied.
Kennedy said that the state could ask for an extension of the original two-year deadline to five years, but that the state should begin to devise a system to select prisoners “least likely to jeopardize public safety.”
The four conservative justices issued two separate dissents. Justice Antonin Scalia, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, read his dissent from the bench, saying the majority’s decision, “affirms what is perhaps the most radical injunction issued by a court in our nation’s history.” The order “ignores bedrock limitations on the power” of judges and “takes federal courts wildly beyond their institutional capacity.”
Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “The Constitution does not give federal judges the authority to run state penal systems.” Alito said that the three-judge order would lead to the premature release of criminals, the number of which is “equivalent of three Army divisions.”
The GAO put the number of illegal aliens in California state prisons at about 27,000 in 2008, or about 10% of the inmate population. The Feds don’t want them deported to stand trial. Those 27,000 would satisfy 90% of the Supreme’s ruling.
Aren’t 80% of people in prison there for non-violent drug offenses?
Take any crumbling high school, finish the top of the chain link fences with barbed wire and set up half way houses for people that shouldn’t be there anyway.
Is this a “liberal” ruling, or a conservative one to require the building of more for profit prisons?
For a while there I thought California was building more jails than schools? I think “the real story” isn’t in the Headline but rather where the Headline doesn’t shine.
and pure “hyperbole” to call this ruling unprecedented. I can think of 3-4 others right off the bat. Something disturbing in the American Psyche all this repressive religions, guns, and chest beating individuality.
Something disturbing.
Ready–great link. Looks like I was WAY wrong. only 16% incarceration due to mere drug possession. But only 25% are for “violent crime.” surely there must be better, aka cheaper, less destructive ways to deal with people we morally disapprove of?
http://lao.ca.gov/laoapp/LAOMenus/Sections/crim_justice/8_cj_whatcrimes.aspx?catid=3
Insert statistic here about how the US has less than 5% of the world’s population yet about 25% of the world’s inmates. Or something like that.
So, in a case of irresponsible State who is inept to keep prisoners as it should vs. the general population who is paying taxes to be protected, The State wins and who gives a damn for general population. That are your Progressive Justices (liberal vote won on this). I side wih descent, specifically – why let out HEALTHY prison population? How are they affected? Let out all the sick, maybe. Force State to sell its resources and cut paychecks to pay for proper treatment, maybe. Take over CA jail system and employees,… probably the best solution. But never, ever endanger any law abiding individual in the population because of inept State management.
@#2 “Looks like the ruling might save the taxpayer about $1.4 billion” – and cost how many law abiding lives, injuries and how much personal property that will CERTAINLY happen when known offenders are let loose? That is one specific duty of the State – to protect its citizens and enforce laws. If they don’t do that – what’s left? Why not just dismantle California as disfunctional state.
Dismal–prison is very expensive and very ineffective==like everything else in ‘Merica.
Prison is a TERRIBLE place–teaching petty theives and layabouts to become actual threats to society===no one should go there except as a last resort.
So, what to do? Laws that make sense to begin with would be a good start. Then intensive counselling for all except the very worse. Maybe even fewer people in jail but the system spending more money for rehab/help/monitoring/public safety.
Jail as the penultimate last chance–but only for very short terms to “highlight” for the recidivist that he’s drawing near to the final solution: break our fair and humane laws after a fair trial and review: death penalty–certain and sure. No reason to warehouse people to everyone’s harm.
Let’s get real.
I’m glad those marijuana dealers are in jail. There is nothing that pisses me off worse than having the seeds pop and burn holes in the habit. If they would clean that shit before they sold it, I’d be a little more forgiving.
Seeds? What decade are you living in?
release all the weed smokers. problem solved.
What the hell, let charlie manson go. He’s an old fart and technically he never killed anyone.
I think this is the key:
“The GAO put the number of illegal aliens in California state prisons at about 27,000 in 2008, or about 10% of the inmate population. The Feds don’t want them deported to stand trial. Those 27,000 would satisfy 90% of the Supreme’s ruling.”
Despite President Obama’s claims the other day, Congress has not done what the people have asked and has not secured the border. I’m all for immigration (my grandparents on one side and great-grandparents on the other side) are immigrants, but they did things the legal way, even though it came with it’s own sacrifices. I’m also not against immigration reform, but I think we need to do something about illegal immigration first.
One day Congress is going to have to wake up, stop kissing Felipe Calderon’s ass, and start dealing with the issues that the Southwest is facing due to illegal immigration.
My take, California should deport the illegals in our prison system. If the Feds say no, then I say we put them on buses/trains/planes and relocate them to DC and let the Feds sort them out there. Release another 3,000 non-violent offenders, and we’re done.
Apologies for screwing up the parentheses in the previous post. Not normally my style.
So the Republicans cut taxes, slash the budget, and the court rules. Now, the Republicans are protesting the release! What nerve.
My limited reading of local drug arrests is that you have the makers, the pushers, and thieves as well as arrests of those out of control and running wild.
People attacking family or who ever has the bad luck to come in contact with them. Know a 78 year old guy that did that last week. Illegally obtained pain killer.
Two former students under twenty died because they or the bleep they were with was wasted and driving inside the last six months. They were high on alcohol mixed with only God knows what. I’m starting to wonder if the elite aren’t hoping these people will kill themselves. Much cheaper than locking them up as long as they don’t take you or a family member out.
Sheriff Joe needs to move to California! Bring on the tents, corn dogs, and pink underwear!
Smokin a dubie was a dubious reason to jail someone anyway, who was not violent, who was not infringing on anyone else’s freedoms.
Let us see to it this spreads.
That’s right, dumb shits. Your Supreme Court is more concerned about “cruel and unusual punishment”, and considers a bit of crowding cruel. Bullshit.
The same liberal justices don’t want the law abiding citizens to be able to have firearms to protect themselves.
So the lib Supremes care more about the Constitutional Rights of criminals than the Constitutional Rights of honest citizens.
Typical.
That’s OK. I have mine. And they aren’t going anywhere.
If any of you don’t have the means to protect your families, you are dopes.
Why not post a sign outside you house….”No guns inside this house.” See what happens.
I side with descent,
Interesting mis-spelling there, dusanmal. Or is it? 😉
Hmm, the Puke’s calculate that it’s at 25% capacity and three shared toilets are sufficient. Closing this gap is going to be tough.
# 17 Vaquero said, post a sign outside you house….”No guns inside this house.”
Sorry. No can do. Wifey has great guns.
>equivalent of three Army divisions.”
So 90% are illegals, of which you want to deport maybe 3/4. Then for the other 32% you do operation dirty dozen.
With this ruling, California has gone from sending a message of Three Strikes and You’re Out in jail for the rest of your life, to there’s no room in prison, do whatever crime you want.
#22, Lyin’ Mike,
Not quite. The message to California is that if you are going to send someone to prison for the rest of their life for stealing a DVD, then you better be able to pay the societal costs of prison. California gets to decide who is released.
But then you would have known that if you read more than the headline.
In the end it’s all like they say:
Steal a chicken and you’ll rot in prison for 20 years.
Steal a billion dollars and you’ll be untouched by the authorities.
I’d be concerned about the DOC letting out some real monsters to justify their absurd police state budget when something bad happens. There are plenty of people with petty probation violations (e.g. pot smoking) to release.
#23 Mr Confusion, I said the message from California to potential killers, not the message from the Supreme Court.
Execute all the violent criminals, humiliate all the petty criminals, rehabilitate all the addicts and deport all the illegals. Then we’ll talk.
I don’t know about this. Prisons are one of the few growth businesses in the US. This can’t be good for the economy, right?
#27–JRDobbs==bravo. Succinct. Rational. Pragmatic. and still room for you and I to be on opposite sides of all remaining questions.
well done.
#27, hail the mighty Church of the Sub-Genius.
#26, Lyin’ Mike,
#23 Mr Confusion, I said the message from California to potential killers, not the message from the Supreme Court.
No you didn’t. Caught in another lie.