5 ms·

Vice released a special last night about mass incarceration related to non-violent drug crimes. It included President Obama visiting a federal prison and interv

Vice released a special last night about mass incarceration related to non-violent drug crimes. It included President Obama visiting a federal prison and interviews with Former Atty. Gen. Eric Holder. Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjWSW94-P3Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjWSW94-P3Y Article: https://news.vice.com/article/president-obama-heads-to-prison-in-pursuit-of-criminal-justice-reform https://news.vice.com/article/president-obama-heads-to-priso...

voltagex_ 11y ago
I don't always agree with the content / viewpoints that Vice puts out, but this was one of the most well made and powerful documentaries I've seen in a while. I'd like to think that President Obama's reactions were genuine and that things might slowly start to change in the US.
- jessaustin 11y ago
  A "genuine" president would have issued hundreds of thousands of pardons for drug "crimes" by this point in his presidency. Obama is just another politician.
  - voltagex_ 11y ago
    Is there any precedent for anything like that?
    - jessaustin 11y ago
      Andrew Johnson pardoned everyone who fought for the Confederacy, other than Jeff Davis and a few other bigwigs. Sure, armed insurrection is a less serious crime than getting high, but I think the precedent stands.
      - jessaustin 11y ago
        Strictly speaking however "precedent" doesn't apply to pardons since they are a power specifically granted the president by Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution. Precedents are important in courts, so if e.g. the Supreme Court had previously ruled that pardoning pot smokers is unconstitutional then that precedent would be relevant. My impression is that the courts don't want to touch pardons, which is only right, since the point of putting them in the Constitution was to give the executive the ability to rein in the vindictiveness of the legislative and judicial branches. I expect that if Congress passed a law attempting to restrict the use of pardons, even the most conservative jurist would toss that shit right out of court.

voltagex_ 11y ago

I don't always agree with the content / viewpoints that Vice puts out, but this was one of the most well made and powerful documentaries I've seen in a while. I'd like to think that President Obama's reactions were genuine and that things might slowly start to change in the US.

jessaustin 11y ago
A "genuine" president would have issued hundreds of thousands of pardons for drug "crimes" by this point in his presidency. Obama is just another politician.
- voltagex_ 11y ago
  Is there any precedent for anything like that?
  - jessaustin 11y ago
    Andrew Johnson pardoned everyone who fought for the Confederacy, other than Jeff Davis and a few other bigwigs. Sure, armed insurrection is a less serious crime than getting high, but I think the precedent stands.
    - jessaustin 11y ago
      Strictly speaking however "precedent" doesn't apply to pardons since they are a power specifically granted the president by Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution. Precedents are important in courts, so if e.g. the Supreme Court had previously ruled that pardoning pot smokers is unconstitutional then that precedent would be relevant. My impression is that the courts don't want to touch pardons, which is only right, since the point of putting them in the Constitution was to give the executive the ability to rein in the vindictiveness of the legislative and judicial branches. I expect that if Congress passed a law attempting to restrict the use of pardons, even the most conservative jurist would toss that shit right out of court.