January 2003

Letters

Editor:

I was delighted to see the series of articles on Indian law published in the November 2002 issue of Bar News. In writing a new chapter for the book Washington Legal Researcher's Deskbook, 3d (2002), on Indian law research in Washington, I found precious little published that could help Washington lawyers with the principles and research tools needed for Indian law issues. These puzzling questions come up frequently in the practice of law in Washington state. Your issue of Bar News has helped to educate lawyers in a very significant and important way.

A detailed table of contents for the deskbook mentioned above can be found at http://lib.law.washington.edu/pubs/db3toc.html. In addition, the Gallagher Law Library at the University of Washington School of Law has indexed the materials found in the Western Regional Indian Law Symposium CLE programs from 1987 to 2001, which can be found at http://lib.law.washington.edu/ref/indiancle.html.

Great job, Bar News!

Editor:

Kudos on the November issue of Bar News. I wish I had seen it before I wrote my article on tribal court systems for the October 2002 issue of the Native American Law Digest.

I'm glad attention is being given to a unique and ever-changing area of the law.

Editor:

I write in response to the article by Ellen Begley with regard to drug policy, that is, policy with regard to drugs such as heroin, cocaine, PCP, methamphetamine and LSD.

Some of these drugs are highly addictive, particularly heroin and methamphetamine. Some of them are mind-altering substances that lead people to do crimes and antisocial acts. Heroin in particular leads people to stop being productive members of society and instead devote life to obtaining heroin. This often means stealing and other crimes. These are the reasons why Congress and the various legislatures unanimously made possession of these drugs criminal offenses. While I suppose some drugs are fun and not everyone becomes a drug addict and a robber, it is safe to say that we would be better off without heroin, PCP, methamphetamine, cocaine and other illegal drugs. One might ask: would you want to be on a ship where half the crew was on heroin? Would you want your sister to be a heroin addict? The answer is probably no.

The King County Bar and the board of the state Bar seem to believe there should be no criminal penalties for possession of these drugs. The state Bar's resolution of December 11, 2001, says that "low-level drug crimes should be approached as health and not criminal problems." They also comment unfavorably on the criminal offense of "selling small amounts of drugs to support a drug addiction." They do not say whether they consider selling small quantities of PCP or methamphetamine or heroin to be a "low-level" crime that should be dealt with as a health issue, but the implication is that they think it should be a "health issue" and not a crime.

Similarly, the King County Bar task force and King County Bar board never directly said there should be no criminal penalties for possession of methamphetamine, PCP, heroin, cocaine and other drugs, but they imply it by saying "violent or other non-drug-related criminal behavior (my emphasis) where drug abuse was a factor should not excuse the underlying crime." In other words, criminal penalties for violent or non-drug-related crimes only. They say that civil remedies supported by contempt sanctions should be used for persons who use drugs to the detriment of others. (From board recommendations of November 20, 2001, and December 2001 King County Bar Bulletin.) This seems to mean that possession of hard drugs should be legalized with some possible exceptions for court orders for "treatment."

This is a formula for destroying society. It is a formula for creating a vast new world of drug addicts. If the laws against drug possession are abandoned, there will be no bar to experimentation and use, and many persons will become addicts. Those who use already will use more, because of the lack of deterrent. One must remember that drug use is fun, profitable and sociable. One must also remember that many offenders do not want to change regardless of how sincere the bar associations may be in wanting to reform them. One must also remember that many offenders ignore "sanctions," regardless of whether they are backed by "civil sanctions." Drug use will escalate. Aside from everything else, society will be overwhelmed with drug users for whom there can never be enough or adequate rehabilitation experts. It is not easy to rehabilitate a heroin addict or a long-term PCP user or for that matter a crack-cocaine user, especially if they don't want to be rehabilitated. Businesses will move out of Washington, too, because who wants to do business in a state dominated by drug users who have no fear? Who wants to have a work force on crack or heroin that perhaps can't be fired?

Various parties claim that punishment and jail do not work. No one has proved or disproved this in a scientific or experimental way. Nothing works perfectly to modify or manipulate human behavior. A better question is how well does our current system of punishment and treatment work compared to other possibilities? This question is difficult to answer, although ultimately the public and the Legislature have to answer it, but the following are obvious: penalties and jail deter some people to some degree from committing some crimes, and it should be society's purpose to deter use of the drugs I have mentioned.

Jail discourages the offender from committing further offenses, by the threat of future incarceration, and sets an example for others so they will not commit offenses themselves and end up in jail likewise. Deterrence. This is why the police have those blue lights when they stop people on the freeway.

The Bar Association as a regulatory agency should take no position on drug policy issues at all, but in any event it should abandon the resolution of December 11, 2001, influenced by the King County Bar's resolution, which seems to call for de facto legalization of possession of hard drugs.

Editor's response: Mr. Ley sometimes is incorrect in his conclusions. The Board of Governors voted to support legislation to adjust the sentencing grid for some lower-level drug offenders, and apply the Department of Corrections' savings to funding drug-treatment programs. The board devoted months of study to the matter and it was debated thoroughly. Among others, the proposals were actively advanced by King County Prosecutor Norm Maleng — no softy on the drug question.