in ,

Contradictions in Trump’s Stance Against Drug Cartels Highlighted

Former President, Trump, has consistently advocated for a more aggressive approach against Mexican drug cartels and advocated stricter penalties for those peddling fentanyl and other drugs on the streets of the United States. In a conversation with state governors in February, he supported the use of capital punishment for drug trafficking, expressing his dissatisfaction with the leniency often shown. However, Trump’s commutation and pardoning of numerous individuals held guilty of drug crimes has ignited heated debates.

Publicidad

In the initial phase of his second tenure, Trump had bestowed clemency upon at least eight individuals convicted of federal drug-related offences, some of whom had a significant criminal record inclusive of violent offenses and gun-related charges. This action of his has led to a state of confusion as pointed out by a policy analyst from a libertarian think-tank. He stated that Trump’s contradiction between advocating harsh penalties for drug peddling while simultaneously freeing individuals convicted previously for the same crime creates uncertainty.

In the context of Trump’s contradictory approach to drug policy is the case of Larry Hoover and the Gangster Disciples. Ron Safer, a former U.S. attorney based in Chicago, who actively contributed to the prosecution of the Gangster Disciples in the ’90s, highlighted the violent and extensive drug operations run by the gang. Under Hoover’s leadership, it was one of the largest and most violent syndicates in the U.S., spreading its influence across 35 states according to the U.S Justice Department.

Hoover, the kingpin, has a history of various convictions, including murder and a firearm offense while trafficking drugs. Safer noted, ‘Hoover led potentially the most malignant and well-organized drug operation in the United States. They raked in over $100 million annually from drug sales in Chicago alone, and are responsible for multiple murders, fiercely defending their drug territories.’.

After being convicted for murder, Hoover was first imprisoned in 1973. Further into the ’90s, Hoover was found guilty of federal charges for his influential role in leading the Gangster Disciples. Presently, there are speculations of Hoover’s potential transfer from a federal supermax prison to a state correctional facility in Illinois. Despite his transition, he is expected to continue to serve his term due to a state-level murder conviction.

Publicidad
Sponsored

In the past, there have been several instances where Hoover requested clemency from the Illinois authorities, but his latest parole effort was soundly rejected by a state review board in December 2022. Yet, this pattern of clemency grants for Hoover and other convicted drug criminals follows a trend set during Trump’s initial term in the White House.

In an apparent deviation from his tough stand against drug dealers, Trump pardoned or reduced the sentences of over 13 individuals convicted for federal drug crimes between 2017 to 2021. Trump further shocked many when he pardoned Ross Ulbricht, a former tech entrepreneur serving a life term for creating the Silk Road – a major online platform for drug traffickers, in his second term’s first month.

Federal prosecutors, after Ulbricht had been sentenced in 2015, had stated in a release that ‘Ulbricht demonstrated a readiness to resort to violence in order to maintain his operation and user anonymity, soliciting as many as six contract murders while running the site.’ Nonetheless, a spokesperson defended these pardons stating that the punishments assigned did not always correspond to the committed crimes. The former President was willing to evaluate if these individuals deserved a chance at redemption.

Publicidad

Even though Trump’s general hard approach towards drug-related crimes has been criticized by some, there were those who tentatively praised his presidential decision to grant clemency to convicted individuals. ‘Trump’s potential decision to provide clemency to those with drug convictions not only offers a key opportunity to these individuals but also consolidates what communities have recognized for a long period – Drug criminalization strategies are essentially harmful and ineffective,’ was an opinion voiced by the leader of the Drug Policy Alliance.

Yet, there is a significant amount of critique directed towards Trump’s overall approach to drug policies. ‘Even though these individual pardons are noteworthy, they starkly contrast the administration’s general tough on crime rhetoric,’ was a critical viewpoint.

Bearing in mind Trump’s last few days in office, the act of pardoning en masse stands contrasted with the similar action taken by President Joe Biden. During his final moments in office, Biden pardoned a considerable number of individuals, a majority of whom had been convicted on federal drug charges, showcasing his unease with the drug war.

In Biden’s words, ‘This step signifies a significant move towards rectifying past misdoings, adjusting sentencing disparities and presenting deserving individuals with opportunities to reunite with their families and communities after spending excessive time incarcerated.’ In contrast to this, Trump’s pardons show an intricate linkage between his campaign and the pardons granted.

According to the analyst, Trump’s pardons appear to be ‘transactional’, excessively influenced by the powerful individuals he interacted with during his campaign. Given this background, Trump’s campaign promise to commute Ulbricht’s sentence seemed more like a part of his campaign strategy than a manifestation of his views on drug policies.

On his campaign trail, Trump certainly did not shy away from discussing Ulbricht’s case, openly stating his plans to commute his sentence ‘On day one, if you vote for me, I will alter the sentence of Ross Ulbricht to time already served.’ This statement fetched him considerable applause.

Trump’s contradictions between his tough rhetoric on the U.S. drug war and his actions through pardoning have generated a considerable amount of debate and analysis, ultimately creating a confusing ensemble of policies regarding the handling of drug-related criminal activity.