« Split SCOTUS outcomes for federal defendants: a plain error win in Rosales-Mireles and an explanation loss in Chavez-Meza | Main | Ailing "ice pick killer" in Texas, seeking to halt his scheduled execution, points to failed efforts in Alabama and Ohio »
June 18, 2018
Attorney General Sessions laments state recidivism data and impact of Johnson ACCA ruling
Attorney General Jeff Sessions today delivered these remarks to the National Sheriffs' Association Annual Conference, and his comments covered lots of criminal justice ground that I do not recall him previously speaking about directly. The speech is worth reading in full because of all it reveals about how AG Sessions' looks at crime and criminals, and here are just some of the comments that caught my attention:
This is a difficult job, but when rules are fairly and consistently enforced, life is better for all — particularly for our poor and minority communities. Most people obey the law. They just want to live their lives. They’re not going to go out and commit violent crimes or felonies.
As my former boss, President Reagan used to say, “Most serious crimes are the work of a relatively small group of hardened criminals.” That is just as true today as it was back then. That’s why we’ve got to be smart and fair about how we identify criminals and who we put behind bars and for how long....
I want to call your attention to something important. A few weeks ago, the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics released a new report on the recidivism rate of inmates released from state prisons in 30 states. This is the longest-term study that BJS has ever done on recidivism and perhaps the largest. It was designed by the previous administration. The results are clear and very important. The results are of historic importance. The reality is grim indeed.
The study found that 83 percent of 60,000 state prisoners released in 2005 were arrested again within nine years. That’s five out of every six. The study shows that two-thirds of those — a full 68 percent — were arrested within the first three years. Almost half were arrested within a year — one year — of being released.
The study estimates that the 400,000 state prisoners released in 2005 were arrested nearly 2 million times during the nine-year period — an average of five arrests each. Virtually none of these released prisoners were arrested merely for probation or parole violations: 99 percent of those arrested during the 9-year follow-up period were arrested for something other than a probation or parole violation.
In many cases, former inmates were arrested for an offense at least as serious — if not more so — as the crime that got them in jail in the first place. It will not surprise you that this is often true for drug offenders.
Many have thought that most drug offenders are young experimenters or persons who made a mistake. But the study shows a deeper concern. Seventy-seven percent of all released drug offenders were arrested for a non-drug crime within nine years. Presumably, many were arrested for drug crimes also. Importantly, nearly half of those arrests were for a violent crime. We can’t give up....
This tells us that recidivism is no little matter. It is a fact of life that must be understood. But overall, the good news is that the professionals in law enforcement know what works in crime. We’ve been studying this and working on this for 40 years.
From 1964 to 1980, the overall violent crime rate tripled. Robbery tripled. Rape tripled. Aggravated assault nearly tripled. Murder doubled. And then, from 1991 to 2014, violent crime dropped by half. Murder dropped by half. So did aggravated assault. Rape decreased by more than a third, and robbery plummeted by nearly two-thirds.
That wasn’t a coincidence. Between that big rise in crime and that big decline in crime, President Reagan and the great Attorney General Ed Meese went to work. There was the elimination of parole, the Speedy Trial Act, the elimination of bail on appeal, increased bail for dangerous criminals before trial, the issuing of sentencing guidelines, and in certain cases, mandatory minimum sentences.
We increased funding for the DEA, FBI, ATF, and federal prosecutors. And most states and cities followed Reagan’s lead. Professionalism and training dramatically increased in local law enforcement. These were the biggest changes in law enforcement since the founding of this country. These laws were critical to re-establishing public safety.
When a criminal knows with certainty that he is facing hard time, he is a lot more willing to confess and cooperate with prosecutors. On the other hand, when the sentence is uncertain and up to the whims of the judge, criminals are a lot more willing to take a chance....
The certainty of a significant and fixed sentence helps us get criminals to hand over their bosses, the kingpins and the cartel leaders — and helps remove entire gangs and criminals from the street. Left unaddressed these organizations only get richer, stronger, more arrogant and violent placing whole neighborhoods in fear.
Law enforcement officers understand that. Sheriff Eavenson and NSA have been critical allies in the fight to preserve mandatory minimums for a long time — and I want to thank you for your strong advocacy. Many doubt their value. Maybe this is obvious, but a recidivist can’t hurt the community if he is incarcerated. A lot of people who would have committed crimes in the 1990s and 2000s didn’t because they were locked up. Murders were cut in half after 1980....
Look, our goal is not to fill up the prisons. Our goal is to reduce crime and to keep every American safe. We should not as a policy keep persons in prison longer than necessary. But clear and certain punishment does in fact make America safer....
One of the most important laws that President Reagan signed into law was the Armed Career Criminal Act. That’s the law that requires a minimum 15- year sentence for felons caught with a firearm after their third robbery or burglary conviction.
These are not so-called “low-level, nonviolent drug offenders” who are being picked on. These are criminals who have committed multiple serious offenses. In 2015 — after 30 years on the books — one critical line of the law was struck down by the Supreme Court as being too vague.
But because of this impactful ruling, every federal prosecutor lost one of their most valuable tools and they ask me for help regularly. Just one example is Jeffrey Giddings of Oregon. He had more than 20 convictions since 1991. He was let out of jail after the Court ruling and only 18 days later shot a police officer and held two fast food employees hostage. He has now been sentenced to another 30 years in prison. And the last thing he did before being put back in jail was to lash out in a tirade of profanity at police....
More than 1,400 criminals — each convicted of three felonies — have been let out of jail in the three years since the Court ruling. And so far, more than 600 have been arrested again.
On average, these 600 criminals have been arrested three times since 2015. A majority of those who have been out of prison for two years have already been arrested again. Here in Louisiana, nearly half of the released ACCA offenders released because of this court ruling have already been rearrested or returned to federal custody....
In this noble calling, all of us in this room are leaders. The NSA is fulfilling its responsibility in this regard. We must communicate sound principles to our policy leaders and to the American people when it comes to reducing crime:
- A small number of people commit most of the crimes;
- Those who are jailed for crimes are very likely to commit more crimes—often escalating to violent crimes — after their release; and
- Congress and our legislatures must consider legislation that protects the public by ensuring that we incapacitate those criminals and deter others
And so the point is this: we should always be looking for effective and proven ways to reduce recidivism, but we must also recognize that simply reducing sentences without reducing recidivism unfairly creates more victims.
This Department of Justice under President Trump is committed to working with you to deliver justice for crime victims and consequences to criminals. We want to be a force multiplier for you.
The President has ordered us to back the women and men in blue and to reduce crime in America. And that’s what we intend to do. We embrace that mission and enforce the law with you.
There is a bit of rich irony to the Attorney General extolling the importance and value of "clear and certain punishment" just before lamenting a SCOTUS ruling that struck down a punishment as too vague to be clear or certain in any way. That irony aside, I am not at all surprised to see him highlight the depressing new data, first blogged in this prior post, revealing terrible recidivism numbers among those released from state prisons in 2005. I am not sure from where the ACCA-post-Johnson-release recidivism data comes, but I am sure all these numbers fuel the AG's belief that we should always be inclined to (over-)incarcerate in efforts to improve public safety.
June 18, 2018 at 12:14 PM | Permalink
Comments
One of the problems with state prison and crime data is that most of the crimes reported and prison commitments are from about 400 counties. In addition the probability of rearrest is much higher than the the probability of initial arrest (driving while barred is frequent example). Alcohol and drug abuse are aggravating factors.
Posted by: John Neff | Jun 18, 2018 3:17:39 PM
Thank you for posting a statement on the failure of the criminal justice system to protect crime victims. Then, I do not appreciate your mocking it.
Your profession is in utter failure. These crimes are 100% the fault of the pro-criminal, rent seeking lawyer profession. It must be crushed and restarted from scratch. The sole unifying factor in all jurisdictions with low crimes rates, even those in the US, controlled by the lawyer profession, have one factor in common. The criminals fear the neighbors more than the police. Public self help is the path to ending all crime.
All alternatives to incapacitation are cruel pranks on the public.
Posted by: David Behar | Jun 18, 2018 3:27:31 PM