As the drug trade in the United States grows, the criminal justice system must adapt to changing landscapes and environments. From designing laws to address certain legal permits for the possession and use of marijuana to cracking down on amphetamine use among night workers, the law has tried to keep up with the continuing demands that illegal drugs place on the judicial system. In particular, an argument has persisted since the late 1980s to change sentencing guidelines that create a disparagement between crack possession and powder cocaine possession.
Crack cocaine, or more simply known as crack, first appeared in inner-city communities in the mid-1980s, eventually leading the government to draft legislation to respond to the growing drug crisis in the whole country. In 1987, the government created specific sentencing guidelines for crack users. According to these sentencing guidelines, 5 grams of crack carries the same minimum sentence of 5 years as 500 grams of regular cocaine.
Given the location of the crack epidemic, which became popular primarily in low-income African-American neighborhoods, many have argued that the government has provided the judiciary with racist regulations. On the other hand, powder cocaine was seen as equally problematic among predominantly Caucasian suburban neighborhoods. The difference between the sentences was seen as a blow against minorities living in cities, who seemed to be the strongest targets of these drug laws.
Between drug agencies and the law, there is not necessarily an agreement on this double standard for drugs. Crack cocaine, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration, is no different from regular cocaine. In some cases, the lack of differentiation between these drugs by law enforcement officials may be cited as a reason for having consistent punishments.