Throughout the 1970s and 1980s Congress and numerous state legislatures enacted mandatory minimum sentencing laws. These laws force judges to deliver fixed sentences to individuals convicted of a crime, regardless of culpability or other mitigating factors. The original intent of mandatory sentencing laws was to reduce inequities in sentencing and target major drug offenders. However, mandatory sentencing laws have failed in that regard and have created a host of other problems.

Removing judges' discretion to impose appropriate sentences does not result in equality in sentencing. Instead, prosecutors have unfettered power to decide which crime an offender is charged with because unlike decisions made by judges, prosecutors' decisions are not reviewable and lack accountability. Furthermore, prosecutors retain sole power to grant a sentence reduction for providing substantial assistance.

Although Congress intended mandatory sentences to target "king pins" and managers in drug distribution networks, this is rarely the case. The U.S. Sentencing Commission reports that only 5.5 percent of all federal crack cocaine defendants and 11 percent of federal drug defendants are high-level drug dealers. This is because the most culpable defendants are also the defendants who are in the best position to provide prosecutors with enough information to obtain sentence reductions. Low-level offenders, such as drug mules or street dealers, often end up serving longer sentences because they have little or no information to provide the government.

The U.S. Sentencing Commission and the Department of Justice have both concluded that mandatory sentencing fails to deter crime. Furthermore, mandatory sentencing has contributed greatly toward prison overcrowding. According to Department of Justice statistics, over 80 percent of the increase in the federal prison population from 1985 to 1995 is due to drug convictions.

Mandatory sentencing has exacerbated the racial and gender disparities that are prevalent in the war on drugs. In 1986, the year Congress enacted federal mandatory sentences, the average federal drug sentence for African Americans was 11 percent higher than for whites. Four years later, the average federal drug sentence for African Americans was 49 percent higher.

Between 1986 and 1996, the number of women in prison for drug law violations increased by 421 percent. In fact, women are the fastest growing and least violent segment of the prison population. This prompted U.S. Bureau of Prisons Director Kathleen Hawk-Sawyer to testify before Congress, "The reality is, some 70-some percent of our female population are low-level, nonviolent offenders. The fact that they have to come into prison is a question mark for me. I think it has been an unintended consequence of the sentencing guidelines and the mandatory minimums."

In 1994, Congress responded to the injustices of mandatory sentencing by creating a "safety valve" to exempt certain first-time, nonviolent drug offenders. In order to qualify for the safety valve an offender must satisfy five stringent criteria to ensure that they are a first-time, low-level, nonviolent offender, who has truthfully provided the government with all the information they have regarding the offense. Unfortunately, the safety valve was not made retroactive and there are still several hundred people serving unjust sentences that date back before the safety valve was enacted.

Mandatory minimum sentencing is costly and unjust. Mandatory sentencing does not eliminate sentencing disparities; instead it shifts decision-making authority from judges to prosecutors, who operate without accountability. Nor does mandatory sentencing deter crime. Although mandatory sentences were designed for drug king pins, only 11 percent of federal drug defendants are high-level dealers. Finally, mandatory sentences have exacerbated the racial and gender inequalities, sending record numbers of women and people of color to prison.