900046
Three Strikes Decision Hits Home
November 5, 2002, 5:00 a.m.
It’s cold and dark out still. Two vans move swiftly along I-295 from Alexandria to Washington, D.C. The vans’ occupants, though still on California time, are wide awake with anxiety and wary hope.
Fifteen family members of Three Strikes inmates have come to Washington from Southern California to witness the hearing that could decide the fate of their loved ones. Representatives from Families to Amend California’s Three Strikes (FACTS), they have worked for over 6 years to amend California’s Three Strikes law, the most draconian by far in the nation, which has resulted in nearly 4,000 nonviolent offenders sentenced to terms of 25 years to life. They’ve come to hear Professor Erwin Chemerinsky argue before the highest court in the land that such sentences are “cruel and unusual” and therefore unconstitutional.
Well before the darkness lifts on the sparse freeway traffic, before the heaters have even kicked in, FACTS State Chair Barbara Ellis begins a searching, eloquent, and detailed prayer for Professor Erwin Chemerinsky. She asks for his safety, strength, confidence, eloquence, and focus. She prays that he will find the words to unlock the hearts of the nine justices on whose opinion hangs the future of thousands, that the lawyers for the state will be “dumbfounded and tongue-tied,” and that the Lord will “enter the Court and penetrate the hearts of the men and women weighing this matter today.”
“My mind was concentrating on what Erwin would be feeling as he woke up and prepared himself for the awesomeness of his task,” recalls Ellis. “And of course my heart was also with my brother Reggie. It was with all of the Strikers; I knew when they rose in the morning they would be thinking about what has happening that day.”
Each traveler is wrapped in thought as the van pushes into Washington traffic, the Capitol’s monuments and seats of power visible in the gray light of dawn.
November 5, from 9:00 a.m. to Noon
Ellis and other family members have been waiting for hours in the brisk November wind, standing in line outside the Supreme Court in order to get some of the coveted seats for the hearing, when Professor Chemerinsky arrives around the corner. Family members see him, greet him with ebullient cheers, and rush to wish him well. Chemerinsky has spent the last several days in intensive preparations for this morning, engaging in mock hearings and sharpening his arguments with the help of ACLU/SC Legal Director Mark Rosenbaum and others.
Members of FACTS, after waiting for hours, make it in.
Inside the courtroom, the family members are scattered throughout the gallery. The customs of the court enforce complete silence. The justices are elevated and sit at the front of the room. This creates an overall atmosphere of coerced reverence, even as the Justices themselves sigh, appear to lose interest, interrupt, make jokes, or put their feet up on the table. Some of the justices treat the issue skeptically, at times caustically, lightly.
March 5, 2003, morning
As word of the 5-4 decision upholding 25-to-life for petty theft spreads to members of the media and to the public, the FACTS office on 3982 S. Normandie, with one phone line and two cell phones, is a chaos of calls and requests for interviews. At the same time, Geri Silva, Executive Director of FACTS, also has to get out a press release and prioritize calls to devastated family members.
Barbara Ellis hears about the decision from Silva. Ellis is at home in San Bernardino, and she has just gotten off the phone with her brother Reggie, which means they might not talk again for several days. She feels sick at the thought that he’ll hear the news from someone else, that she won’t be there to offer words of encouragement and hope.
Asked if the decision makes her angry, she responds, “Actually, I’m more numb than angry. If you’re not numb, you have to accept that you might never see your family member again. And that’s just not acceptable, so a part of you stays numb.”
“I felt devastated by the decision,” recalls Chemerinsky. “Had one Justice gone the other way, Leandro Andrade would be out from prison within a few weeks. Now he must spend 43 more years in prison before he’s eligible for parole — all for stealing $153 worth of videotapes. The decision was so inhumane; not one Justice in the majority expressed concern, let along outrage, at putting human beings in prison for life for shoplifting.”
March 14, 2003
FACTS’ storefront office in South Los Angeles now functions as the headquarters for a growing initiative campaign to reform Three Strikes, spearheaded by FACTS and the ACLU, and guided by the political and fundraising expertise of consultants from the Proposition 36 campaign.
“With seven consecutive defeats in the legislature and the hope of a legal challenge shut down for good, family members have to take this directly to the people,” says Silva. “We know this is winnable, but we’re racing the clock to raise the funds.”
Silva, as always, has to get off the phone, this time to take a call from another supporter. “The Campaign for Sensible Sentencing,” the PAC for the campaign, has committed to a monumental undertaking, but has already enlisted a team of powerful allies, with a growing advisory council including Karen Bass, Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, ACLU/NC Executive Director Dorothy Ehrlich, Assemblymember Jackie Goldberg, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, the Rev. Cecil Murray, ACLU/SC Executive Director Ramona Ripston, Senator Gloria Romero, Congresswoman Maxine Waters, and others.
Silva, now in constant campaign mode, wants to fit in one last pitch. “Tell your readers to get involved in the campaign,” she says.
To support the Campaign for Sensible Sentencing, call the ACLU at 213/977-5219.
MAY 2003
Download Issue as PDF
PATRIOT II Can Be Stopped: Its Up to Us to Debunk False Choice Between Safety and Freedom
Three Strikes Decision Hits Home
Broken Theory: "Broken Windows" Policing Carries Potentially High Costs At No Clear Benefit
Rehabilitation, Emergency Services At Stake In Suit Against County
Making Progress In a Time Of Crisis: Why Its Time For a Major Change
