Oppose Harsh Mandatory Minimum Prison Bills

I stand in strong opposition to the proposed bills HB 314 (Cook), HB 389 (Casteel), HB 862 (Hovis), SB 251 (Moon), SB 281 (Carter), and SB 449 (Trent), which seek to impose harsher minimum prison terms and eliminate parole eligibility for certain offenses. These bills are overly punitive, fail to address the root causes of crime, and risk violating constitutional principles of proportionality and fairness in sentencing. 1. Violation of Proportionality in Sentencing The Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, which includes sentences that are grossly disproportionate to the offense committed. By mandating that offenders serve 75% to 100% of their sentences, regardless of individual circumstances, these bills fail to account for the nuances of each case, leading to unjust outcomes that may violate constitutional protections. 2. Undermining Judicial Discretion These bills strip judges of their ability to tailor sentences to the specifics of each case. Judicial discretion is a cornerstone of our legal system, allowing courts to consider factors such as the offender’s intent, remorse, and potential for rehabilitation. By imposing mandatory minimums, these bills transfer sentencing power from judges to legislators, resulting in a one-size-fits-all approach. 3. Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Populations Mandatory minimums disproportionately affect marginalized communities, including people of color and those living in poverty. Studies consistently show that these groups are more likely to receive harsher sentences due to systemic biases in policing, prosecution, and sentencing. By increasing minimum prison terms, these bills will exacerbate existing disparities, further entrenching inequality in Missouri’s criminal justice system. 4. Economic and Social Costs Missouri already faces significant challenges with prison overcrowding and high incarceration costs. These bills will exacerbate these issues by increasing the number of individuals serving longer sentences, placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers. In addition, longer prison terms hinder rehabilitation and reintegration, as individuals are denied opportunities for parole, education, and vocational training. This undermines public safety by increasing the likelihood of recidivism upon release. 5. Lack of Evidence-Based Policy There is no conclusive evidence that longer prison terms deter crime more effectively than alternatives like restorative justice or mental health treatment programs. Missouri should invest in evidence-based solutions addressing root causes like poverty, lack of education, and substance abuse. These bills prioritize punishment over rehabilitation, ignore the importance of judicial discretion, and risk violating constitutional protections. Instead of enacting harsh mandatory minimums, I urge the legislature to pursue reforms that promote fairness, reduce recidivism, and address the underlying causes of crime.