How Law Fails

The following case were found at saylordotorg.githun.io

Generally a defendant’s status in society is not a criminal act, such as being an alcoholic or a drug addict. Status is who the defendant is, not what the defendant does. Similar to punishment for an involuntary act, when the government punishes an individual for status, it is essentially targeting that individual for circumstances that are outside his or her control. This punishment may be cruel and unusual pursuant to the Eighth Amendment if it is disproportionate to the defendant’s behavior.

In Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), the US Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional as cruel and unusual punishment pursuant to the Eighth Amendment to punish an individual for the status of being a drug addict—even if the drugs to which the defendant is addicted are illegal. 

The Court compared drug addiction to an illness, such as leprosy or venereal disease. Punishing a defendant for being sick not only is inhumane but also does not specifically deter, similar to a punishment for an involuntary act.

In contrast, the case of Powell v. Texas, 392 U.S. 514 (1968), the US Supreme Court upheld the defendant’s conviction for “drunk in public,” in spite of the defendant’s status as an alcoholic. The Court held that it is difficult but not impossible for an alcoholic to resist the urge to drink, so the behavior the statute criminalized was voluntary. 

Also, the Court ruled that the state has an interest in treating alcoholism and preventing alcohol-related crimes that could injure the defendant and others. Pursuant to Powell, statutes that criminalize voluntary acts that arise from status are constitutional under the Eighth Amendment.

If the defendant can control the actions at issue in spite of his or her status, the defendant’s conduct can be constitutionally criminalized and punished pursuant to the Eighth Amendment. This is where the law fails to equally prosecute or protect, respectively, the perpetrator and the victims.

While it is difficult, but not impossible, for a drug addict to resist the urge to enter an altered state of mind by using drugs. It is a conscious and voluntary choice before they facilitate the introduction of drug(s) into their body. Regardless of whether that introduction is oral, injected, smoked, 'snorted', or by any other means. 

If it was impossible to resist the urge to use drugs nobody would seek treatment; let alone successfully complete a drug treatment program. 

Alcoholism is also a treatable illness which is not always 'controllable' by the alcoholic. The State should also have an interest in treating drug addicts and preventing drug addicted crimes, which generally include promoting the sale and use of illicit drugs, theft, burglary, breaking and entering, and other serious crimes which could, and often do, injure the drug addict and others, but not at the expense of innocent taxpayers who are not involved in the crime or the addicted perpetrator!