I have mixed feelings about your post. Marijuana is not the benign drug many imagine. On the other hand,the war on marijuana was lost long ago ,and it is only a matter of time before pot is legal. We certainly have a large number of eager customers here in the land of the Lotos Eaters.
Seems that Obama and his DOJ agree with you terryterry, he is planning to bypass congressionally implemented laws, trial findings and judicially pronounced sentences in order to retroactively free, by means of yet another “presidential decree”, thousands of criminals who are in jail for “only” drug related crimes.
this response is to "help" Passinthru make his point. The President does have the legal privilege to commute sentences of federal prisoners. Sadly, Megyn Kelly--in her outrage--neglected to provide this detail last night. She also neglected to provide the specifics of the class of prisoner that falls under the President's plan. Those to be considered for release are felons who have (a)served at least 10 years of their sentence (b)not been convicted of a violent crime (c) are not affiliated with any gang or drug cartel, and (d) were mostly convicted of drug offenses that required--at the time of their convictions--mandatory minimum sentences. Were those same persons convicted today, when many mandatory minimums have been eliminated, their sentences would have been not as severe as they were.
Your “help” is much appreciated, spellbound ;)
However, I don’t recall denying that Obama has the right, as President, to commute, pardon, or otherwise modify a prison sentence. (In this case he is proposing a remission of sentence, rather than to commute sentence.)
Presidents have historically modified the sentences of individual criminals that have petitioned, what is different, this time is that:
a) No one has petitioned him.
b) He is unilaterally petitioning a whole criminal class to apply for a reduced sentence via his DOJ. With his record, the conditions to be met will soon be modified or eliminated; don’t forget, e.g., he has unilaterally and unconstitutionally changed his own Obamacare no less than 32 times since it became law.
c) He has appropriated this whole concept from Congress, which has been working for months to legally change the sentencing laws. (Remember Congress? Those guys who, in accordance with the Constitution have been elected to make and modify the law?)
d) How will his administration handle the many thousands of “get out of jail free” applicants? Maybe his friends who designed the Obamacare web site can help him?
e) Who is Megyn Kelly?
Passin, you're kidding with c), right? The 535 elected representatives who cannot get out of their own way (or maybe their respective party's way) to conduct a reasonable debate on anything substantive. The Congress that delays needed changes in immigration policy because of false cries of "Amnesty" and "border security". The self same ones who posture before cameras clamoring for their respective 15 second sound bite decrying and denouncing the other side obstructionist curnudgeons or liberal socialist progressives. That Congress is the one to which you refer?
Yes, Bryant, that Congress…..
…..it is (or was) moving forward on the basis of the United States Sentencing Commissions “Proposed amendments to the sentencing guidelines, January 2014”.
The president’s administration snatched this effort and recently presented it as its own idea, presumably on the understanding that the majority of felons benefitting from this change are Democrats, or will believe Obama responsible for their good fortune and thus vote Democrat in the upcoming elections.
Either way, I don’t believe the intention of the Constitution is to permit the President to sideline Congress because in his or your personal opinion it has or has not done anything that he or you would like it to do or not do.