Portraits of Wildflowers

Perspectives on Nature Photography

Posts Tagged ‘flower

Grasshopper central

with 31 comments

While at Tejas Camp in Williamson County on September 25th I though of calling the place “grasshopper central” for the many insects of that kind I saw ensconced on plants and jumping about. Here are two portraits of grasshoppers on river primrose plants (Oenothera jamesii).


◊     ◊     ◊

Yesterday I outlined a proposed Constitutional amendment of mine that would require legislators to read and understand bills before being allowed to vote on them. Actually that would be part of a larger amendment dealing with legislative bills. Here’s more of what I’d like to see included.

1. A legislative bill shall deal with only one subject.

2. The first line of the bill must state what that subject is, and it must conform to the general understanding among the public of what that subject includes.

3. For each pending Congressional bill, every sentence shall be identified by the name and position of the person or persons who wrote the sentence. If the writer(s) acted on behalf of or at the behest of some other person(s) or organization(s), those identifications must also be included.

4. Unless Congress by a three-quarter majority in each house separately declares a national emergency, the complete text of a bill must be released to the public and made readily available online at least 14 days before a bill is brought to a vote.

5. A non-partisan commission created by Congress shall thoroughly examine every final bill and remove all parts of it that don’t conform to points 1–3 above. The commission is also empowered to prevent, and must prevent, voting on any bill whose final form the public has not had easy access to for 14 days.

Point 1 is intended to eliminate the monstrous bills we now get that run to hundreds or even thousands of pages and that include a slew of unrelated things. Politicians too easily hide pet projects and controversial proposals in the welter of such “omnibus” bills. My idea is to have the legislature vote separately on each proposal or small group of related proposals. That would let the public know which legislators support which things.

Point 2 is intended to head off concept creep and gross semantic inflation. For example, the current administration has been referring to anything under the sun as “infrastructure,” e.g. “human infrastructure” and “family infrastructure,” whereas the normal use of the term “infrastructure” includes only physical structures like roads, bridges, airports, dams, power lines, railroads, ports, canals, and the like.

Point 3 is intended to reveal who is actually inserting provisions into a bill. As things stand now, the real promoters are often hidden from the public.

Point 4 is intended to give the public and the press a reasonable amount of time to find out what’s in a bill before it gets voted on.

Point 5 creates a neutral external body to enforce the provisions that members of Congress may be too pusillanimous to adhere to.

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

October 2, 2021 at 4:32 AM

Yumptious yellow

with 35 comments

The other day the word yumptious popped into my mind. Wondering whether anyone had come up with it before me, I searched and found I wasn’t the first to use that portmanteau of yummy and scrumptious (with scrumptious having perhaps arisen as an alteration of sumptuous). Now I’m getting to use that adjective for the river primrose flowers (Oenothera jamesii) I went to see on September 25th at Tejas Camp in Williamson County, where I’d found the species for the first time in 2020.

Before each bright yellow flower emerges at the tip of a long stem, river primrose’s svelte buds are sculptural and textural, as you see below. Notice the reddish tips, above which strides a stilt bug in the genus Jalysus.

⚛︎
⚛︎     ⚛︎
⚛︎     ⚛︎     ⚛︎
⚛︎     ⚛︎
⚛︎

One of the worst statements ever spewed forth from the mouth of a legislator came in 2010: “… We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what’s in it.” That’s not how laws are supposed to be made. Legislators aren’t supposed to vote on bills whose contents they and the people they represent aren’t aware of. The “representative” who made that infamous statement should have been summarily expelled from Congress for dereliction of duty and breach of ethics.

On September 8th I mentioned that in recent years I’ve gradually been crafting amendments to the American Constitution to fix things that are wrong with our government. The would-be amendment I described then involved contributions to political campaigns. Now I’d like to propose an amendment to deal with the horrid thought quoted in the previous paragraph.

Prerequisites for a member of Congress to be allowed to vote on a bill

A.  The member shall read the final version of the bill in its entirety.

B.  The member shall create an uncut video showing the member reading the entire bill, and shall post, at least 24 hours before voting on the bill, the complete video online in an easily accessible place where the public can view it.

C.  The member shall pass a test about the contents of the bill, such test to be created and administered by a non-partisan commission established for that purpose. The test shall contain at least 10 questions and the passing grade shall be set no lower than 80%. A member of Congress who fails may take one retest consisting of a randomly different set of questions about the bill. A second failure shall bar the member from voting on the bill.

D. Each revision of a bill that comes up for a vote shall trigger these requirements anew.

I’m optimistic that these requirements would greatly shorten the lengths of proposed bills and simplify their contents. What do you think?

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

October 1, 2021 at 4:30 AM

More looking up

with 16 comments

As you’ve already seen, at the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center on September 11th I lifted my telephoto zoom lens to photograph a neon skimmer dragonfly. Earlier in our visit I’d lain on a mat on the ground to aim up with my macro lens at something much lower: the jimsonweed flower you see here, Datura wrightii. I rarely convert to black and white, but in this series of pictures I was having trouble getting the sky to look a natural blue. Out of curiosity, I tried monochrome on one frame, as shown below.


◊       ◊       ◊

I’ve already read and recommended two books that treat climate change as real but nothing to get hysterical about, as so many activists and politicians have unfortunately done:

Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn’t, and Why it Matters, by Steven E. Koonin.

Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All, by Michael Shellenberger.

Now I’ve become aware of a third book that also treats the subject rationally: False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet, by Bjørn Lomborg.

In addition to or instead of reading Lomborg’s book, you can watch a one-hour interview with him about climate change.

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

September 27, 2021 at 4:33 AM

Halberdleaf rosemallow flower backlit

with 34 comments

Near the end of my foray through the land in the northeast quadrant of Mopac and US 183 on August 22nd I noticed a halberdleaf rosemallow plant (Hibiscus laevis) some distance away and in a place that was hard to get to. I used my long zoom lens at its maximum 400mm focal length to make this portrait of a backlit flower.


✧     ✧
✧     ✧     ✧
✧     ✧
✧ 

Here’s a good but sad and disturbing article offering yet another confirmation that many American universities have become indoctrination camps with no tolerance for dissent from woke orthodoxy.

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

September 17, 2021 at 4:45 AM

Tiny bee on a rain-lily

with 29 comments

On August 20th at the Hanna Springs Sculpture Garden in Lampasas
I found this tiny bee on a rain-lily, Zephyranthes chlorosolen.



◊      ◊      ◊

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is making like it’s the Centers for Language Control. Yup, that branch of the American government earns the George Orwell Newspeak Award for its latest pronouncements in the world of reality spinning or outright denial. Here are some lowlights.

You shouldn’t say “genetically male” or “genetically female” but rather “assigned” or “designated” “male/female at birth.” This supposedly scientific branch of the government is okay with canceling the science of genetics.

The CDC is big on converting a simple word into a string of words. “Smokers” should be “people who smoke.” Was anyone so in danger of assuming that smokers might include squirrels or vultures that we need to specify that smokers are actually people? Similarly “the uninsured” should be “people who are uninsured,” which thankfully rules out bumblebees, potatoes, and walruses. “Koreans” should be “Korean persons,” I guess so that we don’t mistakenly include any of the Koreans’ pets.

“The homeless” should be “people experiencing homelessness.” Though not in the list, “the clueless” should presumably be called “people experiencing cluelessness.” Actually it’s shorter to replace that with “the CDC.”

But brevity is clearly not the goal in the new suggestions. Anti-brevity is, and therefore the CDC has done at best a middling job. Think about all the missed opportunities for expansionism. “White” could have been “people characterized by having a low melanistic pigmentation and therefore capable of being noticed in dark rooms more easily than people belonging to certain other ethnoracial groups with greater melanistic pigmentation.”

Some of the CDC’s advice does get anti-brief. For example:

“People/communities of color” is a frequently used term, but should only be used if included groups are defined upon first use; be mindful to refer to a specific racial/ethnic group(s) instead of this collective term when the experience is different across groups. Some groups consider the term “people of color” as an unnecessary and binary option (people of color vs. White people), and some people do not identify with the term “people of color”.

“Although the term “LGBTQIA2” is recommended, no explanation is given for what all the letters and the one number mean. The CDC’s new guidelines also missed the chance to announce a contest to determine what the next change to that ever-lengthening alphanumeric string should be. Will the “2” gradually go up to “3” and “4” and so on, in the same way the leading digit on California license plates has done over the past several decades? Or should the string get longer, for instance “LGBTQIA2VM6YR7”? Maybe not, as people might confuse it with a car’s VIN (Vehicle Identification Number). Or, like online passwords, maybe at least one special character should be required, e.g. “LGB#TQIA2V%M6YR7.” No hacker’s ever gonna crack that.

A cynic might say that all the CDC’s changes and complexities will be used to justify hiring a cadre of language consultants to interpret the new terms and rules to hapless bureaucrats (forgive my redundancy). Those language consultants will swell the ranks in the army of diversity, equity, and inclusion consultants already on the dole, thereby revealing the true goal of an ever larger government whose minions regulate all aspects of our lives.

But hey, what do I know? I’m just a person who engages in thinking—formerly known as a thinker.

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

September 4, 2021 at 4:34 AM

Prairie parsley seeds by purple bindweed flowers

with 31 comments

From August 22nd in the northeast quadrant of Mopac and US 183 comes a portrait of prairie parsley seeds (Polytaenia sp.) in front of several purple bindweed flowers (Ipomoea cordatotriloba). I don’t remember taking a picture like this one before, so here’s to novelty. Pitchforks, anyone?


◊          ◊

Another Recent Case of Media Censorship
(I could probably post a new example every day.)

Facebook Suspends Instagram Account of Gold Star Mother Who Criticized Biden.

Facebook’s later admission that the account was “incorrectly deleted” is technically true but doesn’t
change the fact that once again an employee or a politically biased algorithm did delete an account.

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

September 2, 2021 at 4:35 AM

Pale umbrellawort

with 20 comments

Making its debut here today is Mirabilis albida, apparently known as pale umbrellawort, white four o’clock, and hairy four o’clock. I found this one on August 22nd—though six-and-a-half hours earlier than four o’clock—in the northeast quadrant of Mopac and US 183. The USDA map shows the species growing in places as far apart as Quebec and southern California.


◊      ◊
◊        ◊        ◊
◊      ◊

Did you hear the latest news about equity in mathematics? Because the word odd has negative connotations like ‘strange’ and ‘not usual,’ a group of college math students demanded that all whole numbers, whether previously considered odd or even, must now be designated even. Professors of mathematics immediately apologized to the students for the centuries of evenist domination they’d been complicit with, and they promised that no future syllabi or textbooks would perpetuate evenism.

Then an ideologically purer subset of students took issue with the first group, asking why they’d stopped at the whole numbers, which comprise only a tiny oppressive elite of all numbers. The second student group began chanting “Hey hey, ho ho, fraction-phobes have got to go.” The original student group found that chant, especially the “hey hey, ho ho” part, so profound they immediately recognized the disparate impact that their “all whole numbers are even” decree would have on fractions. They agreed that the sacred value of inclusion requires that fractions be included as whole numbers from now on. The mathematics professors promptly issued an apology for not having recognized their unconscious bias against fractions.

It didn’t take long before a third group of math students more woke than the second group started agitating because of the harm that would still befall the irrational numbers, which can never be expressed as fractions no matter how much affirmanumerative action colleges and government agencies give them. Imagine those numbers going through life saddled with the name irrational, as if they’re not in their right mind! The second student group soon confessed their lack of inclusiveness and agreed, for the sake of belonging, that all numbers will now belong to the set of whole numbers. The mathematics professors quickly issued an abject apology for othering the numbers they hadn’t previously accepted as whole numbers.

Barely had things settled down when a fourth group of math students complained that all the previous groups were still oppressors because categorizing numbers in any way at all is racist. For the sake of equity, the fourth group insisted that the only allowable view is that all numbers are equal. From now on, no matter what number a student comes up with as an answer to a question on a math test, that answer has to be correct because all numbers are equal. Similarly, students must now be allowed to pay whatever amount they want for tuition because any number of dollars is equal to any other number of dollars. The mathematics professors immediately acceded to the new demands and issued a deep apology for the violence caused by their previous silence about all numbers actually being equal.

But then a fifth group of students pointed out that all those changes were meaningless because, let’s face it, mathematics is based on objectivity and rigor, which are tools of the cisheteronormative white supremacist patriarchy. The mathematics professors, without even waiting to hear the fifth student group’s demands for change, realized that the only proper course of action was to stop studying and teaching the horrid subject of mathematics altogether, so they shut down the mathematics department. In its place they created a new department to offer Doctorates in Diversity Training (DDT).

Okay, so all those things didn’t really happen—at least not yet. Give it a few months.

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

August 29, 2021 at 4:35 AM

But soft, what light on yonder flower falls?

with 24 comments

The date was August 13th, and the place was a property along Wells Branch Parkway at Strathaven Pass on the Blackland Prairie in far north Austin. You’ve already seen a flowering colony of partridge pea plants there, so now here’s a closeup of a single Chamaecrista fasciculata flower as it opened. Notice how the reddish blush shades through orange to yellow as your eyes follow it away from the flower’s base.


◊          ◊

Our word coincidence comes from Latin, where co meant ‘together with,’ in meant ‘into,’ and cid came from a root that meant ‘to fall.’ A coincidence is ‘things falling into each other.’ The night before last a 1929 movie shown on Turner Classic Movies ‘fell into’ tragic current events. The film, mostly a romantic comedy, was The Love Parade, directed by Ernst Lubitch. The movie marked the screen debut of Jeanette MacDonald, who played Queen Louise in the imaginary country of Sylvania. Opposite her was Maurice Chevalier as the hitherto womanizing military officer Count Alfred Renard (which happens to mean ‘fox’ in French). A synopsis of the film says this: “Queen Louise’s cabinet are worried that she will become an old maid, and are delighted when she marries the roguish Count Renard. Unfortunately, he finds his position as Queen’s Consort unsatisfying and without purpose, and the marriage soon runs into difficulties.”

In a scene that shows the wedding between the royal Louise and the commoner Alfred, the dignitaries include the ambassador from Afghanistan (there’s the coincidence with this week’s tragic events). After the priest follows royal protocol and pronounces the newly married couple “wife and man,” the ambassador comments in a fake language: “A singi. A na hu. A na hu. Prostu, pass harr. Fo malu a yu.” The Sylvanian Prime Minister asks what that means, and the Afghan ambassador’s translator tells him: “He says, man is man and woman is woman. And if you change that, causes trouble. He does not see how any man could stand being a wife. And therefore, he hopes this will be a most unhappy marriage.” The Prime Minister replies: “For heaven’s sake, if he reports this to Afghanistan. Tell him, this is a love match. It will be the happiest marriage in the world.”

Unfortunately, the two-decade involvement of the United States and Afghanistan didn’t end up being the happiest marriage in the world. Things fell apart.

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

August 26, 2021 at 4:22 AM

Standing winecup revisited

with 31 comments

Here are two more portraits of standing winecups, Callirhoe digitata, from the dedicated
little wildflower area at the Floral Park entrance to Great Hills Park on July 23rd.


◊        ◊

Continuing from yesterday with more pictures of this kind of wildflower, standing winecups, symbolizes my wanting to continue with the theme of yesterday’s commentary: the justice system should deal similarly with similar criminal offenses. Alas, that has not at all been the case with the chaotic events of 2020–21 in the United States.

Throughout the second half of 2020, rioters attacked various institutions of our democracy. Among the earliest targets was the Third Precinct police station in Minneapolis. A mob burned it, along with nearby buildings, on May 28th.

Portland, Oregon, was especially hard hit in 2020. On May 29 at the Multnomah County Justice Center, “some crowd members made it inside the building, setting fires while corrections records staff were working inside. Others fanned out across downtown, vandalizing and looting as they went… While many Independence Day celebrations had to be canceled or altered due to the coronavirus pandemic, downtown Portland had plenty of fireworks. After a couple weeks of dwindling crowd sizes, another riot was declared when people launched mortars and other fireworks near the Justice Center and Federal Courthouse, prompting a clash with police and federal officers.” By Labor Day last year, Portland had already had a hundred nights of rioting. Many more followed.

On May 31st in Washington, D.C., rioters tried to storm the White House: “Uniformed Secret Service officers made six arrests Friday night after ‘Justice for George Floyd’ protests. A total of 11 Secret Service officers were taken to hospitals in the D.C. area, according to officials. With 60 uniformed officers protecting the area around the White House, the Secret Service said its officers were kicked, punched and exposed to bodily fluids. Bricks, rocks, bottles, fireworks and other items were also reportedly thrown at the Secret Service, who with U.S. Park Police, held the area by using riot gear, pepper spray and rubber bullets to deter violent riots that ensued after peaceful protests. ‘Demonstrators repeatedly attempted to knock over security barriers on Pennsylvania Avenue,’ a Secret Service statement said. ‘Some of the demonstrators were violent, assaulting Secret Service Officer and Special Agents with bricks, rocks, bottles, fireworks and other items. Multiple Secret Service Uniformed Division Officers and Special Agents suffered injuries from this violence.'” The Secret Service was worried enough about the mob breaking through their lines that it moved the President into a bunker.

I could go on and on, but you get the point. There were hundreds of riots last year. Insurance claims just from the initial period of May 26–June 8, 2020, are estimated at between one and two billion dollars, making the 2020 riots by far the costliest in U.S. history. By the end of August, in Minneapolis–St. Paul alone “nearly 1,500 businesses were heavily damaged in the riots, and many were completely destroyed.” Thousands of people there, many of them minorities, got put out of work as a result.

And rioters murdered people. “A retired police captain fatally shot during looting in St. Louis was passionate about helping young people and would have forgiven those behind the violence on the city’s streets, his son says. David Dorn, 77, was killed while responding to an alarm at a pawnshop overnight Monday, St. Louis Police Department announced in a news conference Tuesday.

And yet relatively few of 2020’s rioters, looters, arsonists, and murderers have been prosecuted.

Now compare those seven months of frequent, violent, destructive rioting in 2020 with what took place in Washington, D.C., over several hours on a single day, January 6, 2021. A mob broke into the Capitol. Some of the rioters damaged the building and assaulted police.

Justice requires, and I wholeheartedly agree, that all of those January 6th rioters should be prosecuted to the full extent the law allows. Our government has indeed put enormous resources into identifying the perpetrators and arresting some 570 of them in places all around the country.

In the last few years, activists on the left have been pushing for and increasingly succeeding in institutionalizing “bail reform,” which means that many people indicted for crimes are allowed bail without having to post any bond money at all. On June 1st, 2020, Kamala Harris urged people to help out rioters who had been arrested: “If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota.” Contrast that with the fact that a few of the people indicted in connection with the January 6th riot at the Capitol have been denied bail. One rationale the judicial system put forth for denying bail is that the people in question organized the riot. However, after more than half a year of extensive investigation, yesterday the news broke that “the FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.”

And yet the riots throughout 2020 did have organizers and provocateurs, most noticeably members of the group that calls itself antifa, who have never even been charged, let alone held without bail.

Some of those indicted for the January 6th riot have been held in solitary confinement, despite the fact that many on the political left have long been making the case against that practice.

In some cases the government has refused to give defendants and their lawyers relevant video footage recorded in and around the Capitol on January 6th. In other cases the government has placed onerous restrictions on defendants and their attorneys who need access to relevant video.

One of the rioters inside the Capitol, Ashli Babbitt, was shot and killed by a police officer, apparently with no warning. That killing may have been justified, but to this day, more than seven months later, the authorities still refuse to identify the police officer or give an account of the event, even to the slain woman’s family. Contrast that with the clamor in recent years to have authorities release within days or even hours the name of every policeman involved in a fatal shooting.

I’m not aware of a single person in 2020 who used the word insurrection to characterize seven months of sustained attacks on the institutions of American democracy: thousands of police officers committed to keeping the peace while allowing people to protest; various police stations and courthouses; and even the White House. Yet when it came to the January 6th riot, activists, politicians, and the media on the left acted as if a commandment had come down from on high: “Thou shalt not fail to call this an insurrection,” and they faithfully obeyed.

Even-handed justice requires that prosecution of rioters with leftist ideologies be carried out as thoroughly and vigorously as prosecution of rioters with rightist ideologies. That’s not what has happened. Our legal system has treated the two groups very differently, and in so doing has blatantly denied equal justice under the law.

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

August 21, 2021 at 4:32 AM

Standing winecup and clouds

with 35 comments

On July 23rd in the dedicated little wildflower area at the Floral Park entrance to Great Hills Park I made some portraits of standing winecups, Callirhoe digitata, yet another member of the botanical family that has featured prominently here in recent posts, the Malvaceae, or mallow family. I’m fond of portraits in which a wildflower seems to be soaring above the clouds, as in this case. For that perspective I get down close to or actually on the ground.


◊        ◊

For as long as I can remember, I’ve believed that our legal system should treat similar things similarly. (Don’t you believe that, too?) For example, it never made sense to me that adults could legally drink alcohol but not smoke marijuana, especially since drinking large amounts of alcohol causes much more damage to individuals and society than consuming large amounts of marijuana. Of course use of either drug entails responsibility: no one should drive drunk or high. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, “Driving under the influence of drugs (DUID) appears to be a growing factor in impaired-driving crashes,” and some jurisdictions are considering drugged-driving laws that would be on a par with drunk-driving laws, now that increasingly many states have been legalizing marijuana.

I bring up my longstanding belief that the legal system should treat similar things similarly because I recently started reading the 2021 book Noise, by Daniel Kahneman, Olivier Siboney, and Cass R. Sunstein. Daniel Kahneman, 2002 Winner of the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, is the author of Thinking Fast, Thinking Slow, which I read several years ago and recommend to you. Olivier Sibony “is a professor, author and advisor specializing in the quality of strategic thinking and the design of decision processes.” Cass R. Sunstein is a professor at the Harvard Law School and the author of various books.

Early in the new book Noise comes a consideration of the sentences meted out to people convicted of similar crimes. In the book’s parlance, such sentences have been “noisy,” meaning they’ve shown undesirably large variation. The book points out that as far back as 1973 Judge Marvin Frankel drew attention to the disparities in sentencing for similar crimes. As a result, a study was done in 1974: “fifty judges from various districts were asked to set sentences for defendants in hypothetical cases summarized in identical pre-sentence reports. The basic finding was that ‘absence of consensus was the norm’ and that the variations across punishments were ‘astounding.’ A heroin dealer could be incarcerated for one to ten years, depending on the judge. Punishments for a bank robber ranged from five to eighteen years in prison. The study found that in an extortion case, sentences varied from a whopping twenty years imprisonment and a $65,000 fine to a mere three years imprisonment and no fine. Most startling of all, in sixteen of twenty cases, there was no unanimity on whether any incarceration was appropriate.”

Studies in subsequent years found similar disparities. In 1984 the U.S. Congress, responding to those studies, passed the Sentencing Reform Act. The law “created the US Sentencing Commission, whose principal job was clear: to issue sentencing guidelines that were meant to be mandatory and that would establish a restricted range for criminal sentences.” A later study compared sentences for certain offenses in 1985, under the old system, with those in 1989 and 1990, under the new system. “For every offense, variations across judges were much smaller in the later period, after the Sentencing Reform Act had been implemented.”

It will probably come as no surprise to you that in spite of the much better uniformity in sentencing that was documented after the guidelines created by the US Sentencing Commission went into effect, many judges complained that they could no longer adequately take account of the particulars in individual cases. “Yale law professor Kate Stith and federal judge José Cabranes wrote that ‘the need is not for blindness, but for insight, for equity,’ which ‘can only occur in a judgment that takes account of the complexities of the individual case.'” In 2005, the United States Supreme Court struck down the obligatory guidelines; they became “merely advisory.” The authors of Noise note that “seventy-five percent of [federal] judges preferred the advisory regime, whereas just 3% thought the mandatory regime was better.”

The result was what could be expected. Harvard law professor Crystal Yang investigated, gathering the data for almost 400,000 criminal defendants. Her study found that in comparison with sentences under the obligatory regime, the disparity in sentencing doubled under the advisory regime. “After the guidelines became advisory, judges became more likely to base their sentencing decisions on their personal values… After the Supreme Court’s decision, there was a significant increase in the disparity between the sentences of African American defendants and white people convicted of the same crimes… Three years after [Judge] Frankel’s death in 2002, striking down the mandatory guidelines produced a return to something more like his nightmare: law without order.” So much for “equity.”

© 2021 Steven Schwartzman

Written by Steve Schwartzman

August 20, 2021 at 4:37 AM

%d bloggers like this: