The Evolution of U.S. Criminal Justice Reform from Clinton's Three Strikes Law to Trump's First Step Act

May 26

Image of Bill Clinton and Donald Trump Courtesy of Wiki

Legislative Actions Aimed at Tackling Crime

The landscape of U.S. criminal justice has undergone significant transformation over the past three decades, particularly with the enactment of two pivotal laws: the Three Strikes and You’re Out Law (Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act) under Bill Clinton's administration and the First Step Act under Donald Trump's presidency. These legislative actions aimed at tackling crime have had varying impacts on black, poor, and minority communities, revealing much about the evolution of criminal justice from punitive measures to reformative strategies.

The Three Strikes Law: A Legacy of Controversy

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, popularly known as the Three Strikes Law or the “Three Strikes and You’re Out Law” for its inclusion of the the Three Strikes Provision, was part of a larger crime bill that was the largest of its kind in U.S. history. It introduced tougher sentencing laws, including a rule that mandated life sentences for individuals convicted of a violent felony after two or more previous convictions, which could include drug crimes. This law was seen as a necessary step in addressing the rising crime rates of the early 1990s.

However, the Three Strikes and Your’re Out Law has been heavily criticized for its disproportionate impact on black, poor, and minority communities. The law led to an exponential increase in the prison population, with a significant number of those incarcerated being non-violent offenders. This has contributed to the United States having one of the highest incarceration rates in the world, with severe social and economic repercussions for affected communities. The policy has been linked to increased racial disparities within the criminal justice system, as black Americans are disproportionately represented in prison populations.

Modest Impact on Crime Reduction: Despite the bill's intention to reduce crime, studies have shown mixed results. For instance, a published study by criminologists John Worrell and Tomislav Kovandzic found that COPS spending, which was a significant component of the bill, had little to no effect on crime rates.

Contribution to Mass Incarceration: The Crime Bill has been criticized for its role in promoting mass incarceration in the United States. The Justice Policy Institute highlighted that the Clinton administration's policies resulted in significant increases in federal and state inmate populations, marking the largest expansion under any president in American history.

Catalyst for Stricter Sentencing Laws: The bill incentivized stricter sentencing laws through its truth-in-sentencing provisions, leading many states to enact laws that required offenders to serve a large portion of their sentences. This contributed to an increase in the prison population by mandating longer periods of incarceration.

Increase in State Prison Population: The Bureau of Justice Statistics projected that truth-in-sentencing practices would lead to an increase in the state prison population due to the incarceration of more offenders for longer periods. This was confirmed by significant growth in the state prison population during the late 1990s.

Limited Federal Influence: A GAO report indicated that federal incentives provided by the bill were not a significant factor in enacting truth-in-sentencing provisions in many states, showing that the bill's influence on state policies was limited in several cases.

Plea Bargains: To manage the increased caseload resulting from tougher sentencing laws, the legal system increasingly relied on plea bargains, which can sometimes result in less fair outcomes for defendants.

Regrets from Politicians: Both Jerry Brown and Bill Clinton later expressed regrets about aspects of the Crime Bill, particularly those that led to an increase in the prison population, such as the three-strikes provision.

The First Step Act: Reform and Rehabilitation

In stark contrast, the First Step Act of 2018 marked a significant shift towards criminal justice reform. This bipartisan legislation focused on reducing the prison population through several key provisions: easing mandatory minimum sentences, increasing judicial discretion, and improving prisoner rehabilitation efforts. Notably, the act reduced the life sentence mandated by the "three strikes" rule to 25 years and expanded the safety valve to allow judges more flexibility in sentencing for non-violent drug offenses.

Key Facts About the First Step Act:

Legislation Overview: Officially known as the "Formerly Incarcerated Reenter Society Transformed Safely Transitioning Every Person Act," this act aims to reform federal prisons and sentencing laws in the U.S.
Legislative Journey: Introduced as H.R. 5682 by Rep. Doug Collins [R-GA-9] and passed the House swiftly before the Senate revised and passed it with additional sentencing reforms.
Key Provisions: Includes the establishment of a national risk and needs assessment system, prohibition on the use of restraints on pregnant prisoners, and expansion of compassionate release.
Senate Amendments and Final Approval: Passed in the Senate by an 87–12 vote, it was signed into law by President Donald Trump on December 21, 2018.
Implementation and Impact: Over 3,000 federal prisoners were released under the new good-time credits calculations within the first year. The act also implemented the PATTERN risk and needs assessment tool, though it faced criticism for potential racial bias.

Impact and Ongoing Challenges

The impacts of these laws are profound and far-reaching. While the Three Strikes Law has been associated with negative outcomes such as overcrowded prisons and increased incarceration rates among minorities, the First Step Act has been met with optimism for its potential to reverse some of these trends. However, critics of the First Step Act argue that while it is a step in the right direction, it is only a modest beginning to the necessary overhaul of the U.S. criminal justice system.

Equitable Justice Policies

As we reflect on the changes brought about by these significant pieces of legislation, it becomes crucial for informed citizens to engage in ongoing discussions about criminal justice reform. Readers of infodecon.com are encouraged to stay informed about these issues, participate in community discussions, and support initiatives that advocate for fair and equitable justice policies. By remaining engaged, we can help ensure that future reforms build on the progress made by the First Step Act and continue to address the disparities highlighted by the Three Strikes Law.