Ranking Drug Harms for Sentencing Policy

26 Pages Posted: 6 Jun 2015

See all articles by Paul Jeffrey Hofer

Paul Jeffrey Hofer

Sentencing Resource Counsel Project; Johns Hopkins U. Dept. of Psychological and Brain Sciences

Date Written: May 31, 2015


Unidimensional rankings comparing the harmfulness of different drugs have been criticized as too simplistic for policy making. A type of unidimensional ranking of direct drug harms is needed for sentencing policy making, however, in order to implement the sentencing principle of just desert. Available empirical evidence of the relative harmfulness of illegal drugs on several measures of direct harm is reviewed. Data on typical dosage weight is used to evaluate the proportionality of current federal mandatory minimum statutes and guidelines for drug trafficking offenses. Several drugs that rank relatively low on harms are punished as, or more, severely than drugs that are far more harmful. Mandatory minimum statutes and congressional directives to the United States Sentencing Commission must be repealed or revised before recommendations of the federal sentencing guidelines will result in proportionate punishment.

Keywords: sentencing guidelines, mandatory minimums, drug policy, drug harms

Suggested Citation

Hofer, Paul Jeffrey and Hofer, Paul Jeffrey, Ranking Drug Harms for Sentencing Policy (May 31, 2015). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2612654 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2612654

Paul Jeffrey Hofer (Contact Author)

Johns Hopkins U. Dept. of Psychological and Brain Sciences ( email )

Baltimore, MD 21218
United States

Sentencing Resource Counsel Project ( email )

Washington, DC 20036

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
PlumX Metrics