Strikes me this article on Biden’s clemency plan is extremely disappointing for several reasons. nytimes.com/2021/05/17/us/…
Most critically: Biden says that he’s going to let prosecutors at DOJ who prosecuted these cases make decisions on who deserves clemency. This is a TERRIBLE idea. It relies on people who committed a vast injustice to admit their error and fix it, rather than an outsider.
The process is also EXTREMELY bureaucratic and difficult for most incarcerated people/formerly incarcerated people to navigate.
Also at a time when Congress is a roadblock to nearly all of Biden’s priorities, he is going to wait until his SECOND year to begin use a completely unrestrained, unchecked power that he could be using weekly? Absolutely insane.
Furthermore, the focus on nonviolent drug offenses, ignores that there are tons of people who committed violent offenses who are rehabilitated and deserve clemency. Governors in many states (LA, OR, CA, PA) have recognized clemency shouldn’t be only for the nonviolent.
This point is absolutely key and deserves more attention. Few people did more than Biden to construct excessively punitive federal laws that led to mass incarceration. He has a moral obligation to use his unchecked clemency power to address the VAST injustice he caused.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with David Menschel

David Menschel Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @davidminpdx

19 May
1. With Larry Krasner winning by a nearly 2 to 1 margin, I wonder how many of these reporters and editors will do some soul-searching tomorrow about the entirely fantastical backlash they sough to create without any evidence at all? ImageImageImageImage
2. This same piece was pretty much everywhere. Was no real evidence for any of it, other than “shit the police union was saying.” ImageImageImageImage
3. I mean the sheer sameness of the takes was pretty astounding. ImageImageImageImage
Read 5 tweets
18 May
1. A 75-year-old Louisiana woman was freed after four decades in prison. Reform District Attorney of New Orleans Jason Williams said she never should have been convicted in the first place because she killed a man who was raping her. nola.com/news/courts/ar…
2. The woman had a strong “stand your ground” style self-defense claim, but prosecutors in the early 1980s ignored her account, in part because date rape was not yet a culturally accepted idea. nola.com/news/courts/ar…
3. How sexist was the prosecution? One assistant DA questioned whether she was “sort of asking for it.” Another faulted her for failing to run out of her own house – even though she had no legal obligation to do so. nola.com/news/courts/ar…
Read 4 tweets
22 Apr
1. The new ultra-conservative Supreme Court abandons the more muscular understanding of Miller/Montgomery which demanded that a judge find a juvenile is “permanently incorrigible” before sentencing a juvenile to life without the possibility of parole. supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf…
2. The court guts 100,000s of hours of work by lawyers like me and others to end the barbarous practice of sentencing children to LWOP. It says that so long as a judge has discretion to sentence a child to less than LWOP, the constitution is satisfied.
3. This is pretty deep in the weeds, but in some ways today’s ruling by Kavanaugh is the fault of Justice Kagan whose poorly written opinion in Miller v. Alabama (as opposed to Kennedy’s broader Montgomery) makes such a retrogression easy.
Read 14 tweets
20 Apr
1. I’m going to start a thread as a way of documenting the use of the repulsive euphemism “officer involved shooting” as a way of documenting its use and shaming the reporters and news outlets that use it.
2. In April 2021 @WKBN, ostensibly a news outlet, used the euphemism “officer-involved shooting.”
3. In April 2021 @KOINNews, ostensibly a news outlet, used the euphemism “officer-involved shooting.” koin.com/news/crime/sus…
Read 9 tweets
10 Apr
1. Here I am what 10 paragraphs into this truly garbage fear-mongering piece of bullshit “journalism” and it hasn’t mentioned: the DA tried this for a year — a year when violent crime was up in many places — and in FELL in Baltimore.
2. It’s also yet to mention this new study that shows that PRECISELY the “tough on crime” behavior that the article *assumes would make crime go down ACTUALLY MAKES CRIME, INCLUDING VIOLENT CRIME GO UP. bostonglobe.com/2021/03/29/met…
3. The entire frame of the article is bad and wrong AND CONTRADICTED BY SCIENCE. This piece is akin to climate change denialism. It’s not journalism grounded in objective reality, it’s journalism grounded in false and ignorant bias.
Read 4 tweets
9 Apr
1. The desire to denigrate the “defund the police” movement – an important goal of reactionary-liberal media-commentators who enjoy punching left – erases the massive value and deep insight that "defund the police" protests last summer brought to the fore.
2. Prior to last summer police reform mostly focused on improved training, systems to hold officers accountable, using new technologies (like body cams), etc. i.e. *things that were budget neutral or even increased police funding and didn’t shrink the scope of policing.
3. The insight of the “defund the police” movement is a recognition that police play too large a role in our understanding of and approach to public safety. And reforms must go beyond “reformist reforms” and instead that *shrink the scope* of policing and/or reduce budget,
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(