Too blunt for just outcomes: Why the US terrorism enhancement sentencing guidelines are unfair, unconstitutional and ineffective in the fight against terrorism report

Description

Although there are real areas of concern in relation to due process and procedural impropriety, the focus of this report is on the sentencing guidelines that are used in cases involving Muslims. Even where the convictions against a Muslim suspect bear only a very peripheral relation to terrorism, a terrorism enhancement is being applied which dramatically increases the number of years to be served by the defendant.

The report shows a number of examples of the widespread way in which the sentencing guidelines are being used in order to criminalise Muslims and indeed increase the fear and stigma surrounding terrorism within the Muslim community. Guantanamo may well be the symbol of arbitrary detention and removal of due process, however, the US mainland requires much work before it can lay claim to a fair, open and justice system for all.

(NOTE: CAGE represents cases of individuals based on the remit of our work. Supporting a case does not mean we agree with the views or actions of the individual. Content published on CAGE may not reflect the official position of our organisation.)