Week 11 Material - How mandatory minimums perpetuate mass incarceration and what to do about

What are mandatory minimum sentences?

Laws that require judges to impose a fixed minimum prison term for specific crimes, regardless of individual circumstances.

When did mandatory minimums become widespread in the U.S.?

During the 1980s–1990s “tough-on-crime” era; by 1995, all 50 states and the federal government had them.

What types of laws expanded under the tough-on-crime movement?

“Three-strikes” laws (25 years to life) and “truth-in-sentencing” laws (requiring 85% of a sentence to be served).

What kinds of crimes are most often affected by mandatory minimums?

Mostly nonviolent and drug-related offenses, not violent crimes.

How do mandatory minimums affect judicial discretion?

They remove judges’ ability to tailor sentences to individual cases and circumstances.

Who gains more power because of mandatory minimums?

Prosecutors, since they control the charges that trigger mandatory sentences.

What racial disparities exist in mandatory minimum sentencing?

Black and Hispanic people are disproportionately sentenced under these laws compared to white defendants.

What example shows racial impact in state data?

In New York, 91% of arrests for mandatory-eligible crimes involved people of color.

How do mandatory minimums contribute to mass incarceration?

They lengthen prison terms, increase the prison population, and reduce opportunities for early release.

What are some social effects of prison overcrowding caused by these laws?

Worsened living conditions, reduced access to rehabilitation, and strained prison resources.

What does the article say about the effectiveness of mandatory minimums in reducing crime?

There’s no proven crime-control benefit; they mostly cause harm and inequality.

What are some recent reform efforts?

Nearly half of U.S. states and the federal government have rolled back or reduced mandatory minimums for drug offenses.

What are “truth-in-sentencing” laws?

Laws requiring prisoners to serve most (usually 85%) of their sentence before becoming eligible for release.

Why do mandatory minimums persist despite reform evidence?

Political pressure, public fear, and “tough-on-crime” rhetoric keep them in place.

What is the recommended long-term solution?

Eliminate all mandatory minimum sentences.

What should happen to people already serving mandatory minimums?

Reforms should be applied retroactively to allow resentencing or early release.

What alternative approaches does the article suggest?

Individualized sentencing, earned-release programs, diversion programs, and early intervention.

What values does the article emphasize for future justice reform?

Fairness, rehabilitation, and public safety instead of punishment and severity.

How do mandatory minimums harm communities of color?

They reinforce racial inequities, separate families, and deepen poverty cycles.

What is the overall conclusion of The Sentencing Project’s report?

Mandatory minimums perpetuate mass incarceration and racial disparities without improving safety; they should be eliminated and replaced with evidence-based reforms.