When Constitutional Rights Seem Too Extravagant to Endure: The Crack Scare's Impact on Civil Rights and Liberties (From Crack in America: Demon Drugs and Social Justice, P 229-248, 1997, Craig Reinarman and Harry G Levine, eds. - See NCJ-170648)

• NCJ Number: 170659
• Author(s): I Glasser; L Siegel
• Date Published: 1997
• Length: 20 pages
• Sale Source: University of California Press
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: DCC

Annotation

This paper identifies some of the racist consequences of contemporary drug policies, and the authors contend the "crack scare" makes these consequences worse.

Abstract

Twin themes of enslaved drug addicts and of drug traffickers peddling deadly and destructive substances have been used repeatedly to justify government repression and constitutionally questionable practices. President Reagan declared a war on drugs in 1982, and the Anti-Drug Abuse Act was enacted in 1986. The war metaphor has been very appealing to architects of repressive drug policies. Rhetoric of the war on drugs depicts a life-and-death struggle between good and evil, between moral abstainers and immoral drug users. Efforts by police departments throughout the United States to eliminate drug dealing sometimes resemble indiscriminate military operations as opposed to careful police work and as such may violate the constitutional rights of citizens. The 4th amendment protects people against unreasonable searches and seizures, and this amendment has come under special attack over the past decade in drug law enforcement cases. The 14th amendment guarantees equal protection under the law, and the war on drugs has made disparities in the treatment of different racial groups significantly greater. The war on crack is viewed as a war on civil liberties because drug policies resulting from the crack scare have unfairly targeted black Americans and other minorities. 66 notes