Heritage Foundation has a new report on the ever increasing number of federal crimes enacted by Congress.

This study reviews the crimes newly enacted by Congress in order to: (1) update the number of fed­eral crimes; (2) measure whether Congress contin­ues to pass federal criminal laws at the same pace found by the ABA report; and (3) determine whether the new crimes contain a mens rea require­ment, a key protection of the common law that pro­tects those who did not intend to commit wrongful acts from unwarranted prosecution and conviction.

Bottom line: An average of 56.5 new crimes are enacted yearly.

The growth of federal crimes continues unabated. The increase of 452 over the eight-year period between 2000 and 2007 averages 56.5 crimes per year—roughly the same rate at which Congress cre­ated new crimes in the 1980s and 1990s. So for the past twenty-five years, a period over which the growth of the federal criminal law has come under increasing scrutiny, Congress has been creating over 500 new crimes per decade. That pace is not steady from year to year, however; the data indicate that Congress creates more criminal offenses in election years.

[Hat tip to Ed Still of VoteLaw.]

One ramification of prosecutions that are tainted by politics, like that of Don Siegelman, is that every Justice Department investigation of a Democratic politician is now viewed with suspicion. It doesn't help when federal law enforcement authorities use tactics like this:

Sue Schmitz, [an Alabama] state representative, was arrested in the bathroom of her home while she was taking an early morning shower.... She is awaiting trial on charges that she accepted more than $175,000 in college salary for work she didn't perform.

Not the kind of accusation that creates a great risk of flight. They couldn't call and make an appointment for her to turn herself in? No wonder Alabama state senator Pat Lindsey says: "There's some bitterness there toward the U.S. attorney's office and the Department of Justice."

A lengthy article in today's Press-Register asks: Are Prosecutors Out Of Control? [more ...]

State legislators, always searching for a new punishment to show how tough they are on crime, find all kinds of reasons to suspend driver's licenses.

The folks I see [in traffic court] are cited because they neglected to pay a ticket, and were suspended. The folks I see are cited because they neglected to show up in court, and were suspended. The reasons for these scofflaws' non-appearance? They have no money. They are unemployed, poor, broke, foreclosed.

In Wisconsin, licenses are suspended for underage drinking. Legislators are quite certain that college kids won't drink until they turn 21 if they fear the loss of a driver's license for attending a house party. And that works ... not at all. Unfortunately, a policy's failure rarely motivates a legislature to rethink the policy. [more ...]

You may see London, you may see France, but in Flint, Michigan, you won't see underpants.

Police are cracking down, sending out notice that they will begin making arrests for those wearing saggy pants.

Pants pulled completely below the buttocks with underwear showing is disorderly conduct; saggy pants with skin of the buttocks showing is indecent exposure, and saggy pants, not completely below the buttocks, with underwear exposed results in a warning.

Here's the chart of offenses with pictures of what constitutes disorderly conduct or indecent exposure that will land you between 93 days to a year in jail. Also, the police warn that if they stop you for saggy pants, they have the right to search you for evidence of other crimes, such as weapon and drug possession. [More...]

[Photo from the DEA Gift Shop]

The Drug Enforcement Administration turns 35 this week. Here is a little history :

It was created by executive order of President Richard Nixon and went live on July 1 1973.

At its outset, the DEA had 1,470 Special Agents and a budget of less than $75 million. Furthermore, in 1974, the DEA had 43 foreign offices in 31 countries. Today, the DEA has 5,235 Special Agents, a budget of more than $2.3 billion and 86 foreign offices in 62 countries.

Since 1973, drug arrests have tripled: [more...]

The Justice Department today released the final Sex Offender Registration and Notification ACT (SORNA) Guidelines. These are the guidelines for the Adam Walsh Act's sex offender registration and notification provisions. A copy of the guidelines is here (pdf.)

The Act is officially known as the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. The Guidelines are in Title I of the Act, named the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA). The DOJ office that released the guidelines is the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing,
Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking (SMART).

The final guidelines incorporate changes to the intitial guidelines made following a period of public comment. SMART explains the revisions here (pdf).

Sex offenders are society's newest pariahs. Even those as young as 14 (pdf).

With good reason, almost nobody believes that it should be legal for an adult to have sex with a ten year old child. But what about the 18 year old who participates in a sex act initiated by a 16 year old? What if the 16 year old lied about his or her age to the 18 year old?

The age at which a teenager is legally entitled to consent to sex varies from state to state, but tends to be in the range of 16 to 18. Some states treat "statutory rape" as a less serious offense if the adult and minor are not separated by more than 4 years of age. Some permit a defense of "mistake of age," but most do not.

Two years ago Ireland's Supreme Court struck down a statutory rape law because it did not permit a defense that the adult was reasonably mistaken about the minor's age. The Director of Public Prosecutions supports a referendum to restore the "strict liability" law; that is, mistake of age would not be a defense. Meanwhile the Irish parliament struggles to replace the law. It must decide whether to set an age at which the defense of mistake will not apply, and where to set the age of consent. Here's one view that American states would do well to adopt: trust juries. [more ...]

The headline in the Metro section of today's New York Times only tells half the story:

Tasers Getting More Prominent Role in Crime Fighting in City

The title to this post reflects the other half.

NYPD officers now use their 500 Tasers in limited situations. Expanding Taser use is a perilous experiment. It isn't particularly comforting to know that only sergeants will have the authority to handle Tasers, in light of this:

Stun guns were introduced in New York in the early 1980s, when officers were confronting a higher number of disturbed people because of the rapid and widespread deinstitutionalization of mental health patients. The devices were not seen as a success. ... Several high-ranking officers and sergeants were transferred from the 106th Precinct in Queens after officers were charged with using stun guns on drug suspects during interrogations. [emphasis added]

The most important facts, at which the Times headline does not hint, come at the end of the linked article: [more ...]

A new U.S. study finds that marijuana potency has increased in recent years. The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy responds like Henny Penny claiming the sky is falling. :

[Drug Czar John Walters] cited the risk of psychological, cognitive and respiratory problems, and the potential for users to become dependent on drugs such as cocaine and heroin.

A more rational view: [More...]

Innocent people are convicted in Georgia, just like everywhere else. The problem will only grow worse now that Georgia, in an effort to trim the state budget, plans to lay off 17 public defenders in Fulton County.

On Monday, the county’s chief judge, Doris L. Downs, called the layoffs “irresponsible.”

For every public defender laid off, the same fate should befall a prosecutor. Why should those who are committed to defending the rights of the accused carry the weight of the state's failure to generate the tax revenues needed to make the criminal justice system operate fairly? [more ...]

The Washington Post today reports on some crack defendants who were able to leave prison early due to the recent retroactive sentencing guideline reductions. They seem to be coping pretty well, considering the changed world they've returned to after a decade or more behind bars.

More than 7,000 crack cocaine offenders ... have received reduced sentences since March, when the U.S. Sentencing Commission put retroactive sentence guidelines into effect to offset what the commission felt were overly harsh punishments for crack cocaine related crimes, and it is an open question whether they will succeed or return to a life behind bars.

....Nearly 90 percent of those who received the tough sentences for crack cocaine were black men and women. Most users and dealers of powder cocaine are white and Latino.

There were 19,500 federal inmates serving sentences for crack when the reduction went into effect in March. Many aren't eligible for the reduction for a variety of technical reasons. For others, mandatory minimum sentencing laws which trump the guidelines will prevent them from getting a reduced sentence. The Government files objections to scores of requests, arguing either that the reduction doesn't apply to a particular defendant or the court should exercise its discretion and deny the relief.

The recent reduction is but a first baby step towards what's needed to reintroduce fairness into our federal criminal justice system. [More...]

A NY Times editorial urges Congress to appropriate full funding to the Second Chance Act. Especially noteworthy is the reminder that some state governments are already making a serious effort to reduce recidivism with programs that help offenders build a new life after their release from prison.

In Illinois — where the inmate population has doubled since the late 1980s — Gov. Rod Blagojevich has begun a promising re-entry program that could become a national model. The comprehensive plan includes drug treatment, job training and placement and a variety of community-based initiatives designed to help newly released inmates forge successful postprison lives.

Illinois is also revamping its parole system by hiring more parole officers and changing regulations so that parolees who commit lesser violations are dealt with in their community — with counseling, drug treatment or more vigilant monitoring — rather than being reflexively sent back to prison.

It was once a common belief that offenders who "paid their debt to society" were entitled to a second chance. Those feelings have been overtaken by a "lock 'em up forever" mentality, but the reality is that prisoners are released every day even as prison populations continue to grow. If we don't help them build new lives, we increase the risk that they will commit new crimes. Funding the Second Chance Act is a no-brainer.