Families Against Mandatory Minimums

Mandatory Sentences

Congress enacted mandatory sentencing laws in 1986 because lawmakers believed that rigid, severe drug laws would catch drug kingpins and deter others from entering the drug trade. The laws established drug weight and type as the only factors that judges can consider in determining drug sentences and prescribed fixed and predetermined sentences for these crimes. In 1988, Congress created new mandatory sentences for drug conspiracy (under which drug weight had only to be alleged) and the presence of a firearm during a felony offense, as well as a five-year mandatory sentence for mere possession of five grams of crack cocaine. Most states also enacted mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses in the 1980s.

As a result of these mandatory laws, judges can no longer consider the severity of the offense, an offender's role in the crime, or the offender's potential for rehabilitation when determining the sentence. This rigidity has led to thousands of lowlevel offenders and addicts now serving sentences designed for kingpins. In addition, the laws disproportionately affect minorities. African Americans account for 12% to 13% of America's general population, yet they comprise 30% of those receiving federal mandatory drug sentences. Hispanics constitute 12% of the general population but receive 43% of mandatory drug sentences. Mandatory sentences also affect an increasing number of women. In 1997, nearly 72% of federal female prisoners were serving drug sentences. Taking a message for a boyfriend involved in a drug deal or driving him to the bank can lead to conspiracy charges and the woman can be charged for the entire amount of drugs sold.

The Establishment of FAMM

Julie Stewart founded FAMM in 1991 when her brother was arrested for growing marijuana and sentenced to five years in prison under mandatory sentencing laws established by Congress in 1986. From this small beginning, FAMM has grown to an organization of more than 28,000 members, including individuals, organizations, prisoners, and their families. Its national office is located in Washington, D.C., while state coordinators maintain chapters in many states. FAMM lobbies for the repeal of mandatory drug sentences and the return to limited judicial discretion, as established in the U.S. sentencing guidelines, which govern all other federal criminal cases. Under sentencing guidelines, judges base decisions on all the facts of the case and select from a range of sentences based on those facts.

Current Projects of FAMM

FAMM concentrates its efforts in five areas. The Legislative Outreach Project lobbies Congress and the U.S. Sentencing Commission to reform severe federal mandatory sentences and federal sentencing guidelines. State projects advocate sentencing reform in states with particularly harsh sentencing laws and work to prevent adoption of additional mandatory sentences.

The FAMM Litigation project was organized in 1995 to provide litigation assistance of pro bono counsel for cases that involve important or evolving sentencing issues before the U.S. Supreme Court, the lower federal courts, and the state courts. To bring public attention to harsh and disproportionate mandatory sentences on low-level, nonviolent offenders, the litigation project also accepts a handful of cases involving grave injustice, regardless of the legal issue presented. The project is guided by in-house counsel and an advisory board of prominent criminal defense attorneys and law professors, and it is aided by prestigious law firms with pro bono programs.

...