War on drugs

For other uses, see War on drugs (disambiguation).

War on drugs
A U.S. government PSA from the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration with a photo image of two marijuana cigarettes and a "Just Say No" slogan.
Date June 17, 1971 – present (52 years, 7 months, 4 weeks and 1 day) Location Global Status Ongoing
Belligerents
United States United States police United States Armed Forces Allies of the United States  United Nations United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime	Drug traffickers Drug cartels

The war on drugs is the policy of a global campaign,^[1] led by the United States federal government, of drug prohibition, military aid, and military intervention, with the aim of reducing the illegal drug trade in the United States.^[2][3][4][5] The initiative includes a set of drug policies that are intended to discourage the production, distribution, and consumption of psychoactive drugs that the participating governments, through United Nations treaties, have made illegal.

The term "war on drugs" was popularized by the media shortly after a press conference, given on June 17, 1971, during which President Richard Nixon declared drug abuse "public enemy number one".^[6] He stated, "In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive. … This will be a worldwide offensive. … It will be government-wide … and it will be nationwide." Earlier that day, Nixon had presented a special message to Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control, which included text about devoting more federal resources to the "prevention of new addicts, and the rehabilitation of those who are addicted" but that aspect did not receive the same public attention as the term "war on drugs".^[7][6][8][9]

In the years since, presidential administrations have generally maintained or expanded Nixon's original initiatives, with the emphasis on law enforcement and interdiction over public health and treatment.

In June 2011, the Global Commission on Drug Policy released a critical report, declaring: "The global war on drugs has failed, with devastating consequences for individuals and societies around the world."^[1] In 2015, the Drug Policy Alliance, which advocates for an end to the war on drugs, estimated that the United States spends $51 billion annually on these initiatives; in 2021, after 50 years of the drug war, others have estimated that the US has spent a cumulative $1 trillion on it.^[10][11]

History

Main article: History of United States drug prohibition

See also: Legal history of cannabis in the United States

Drugs in the US were largely unregulated until the early 20th century. Opium had been used to relieve pain since the Revolutionary War (1775-1783), particularly in the treatment of soldiers during wartime. In the 1800s, the use of opiates in the civilian population increased dramatically,^[12] and cocaine use became prevalent.^[13][14] Alcohol consumption steadily increased, as did the temperance movement, well-supported by the middle class, promoting moderation or abstinence.^[15][16] The practice of smoking cannabis spread in the early 1900s.^[17]

Mid-1800s–1909: Proliferation of unregulated drug use

The latter half of the 19th century saw a ramping up of opiate use in America. Early in the century, morphine had been isolated from opium, decades later, heroin was created from morphine, each more potent than the previous form.^[18][19] With the invention of the hypodermic syringe, introduced in America mid-century, opiates were easily administered and became a preferred medical treatment. During the Civil War (1861-1865), millions of doses of opiates were distributed to sick and wounded soldiers, addicting some;^[12] home gardens were turned to poppies for opium processing in the war effort.^[20] In the civilian population, physicians treated opiates like a wonder drug, prescribing them widely, for chronic pain, irritable babies, asthma, bronchitis, insomnia, "nervous conditions", hysteria, menstrual cramps, morning sickness, gastrointestinal disease, "vapors", and on.^[12][21][22]

With no federal restrictions, drugs were also marketed over-the-counter to consumers. Laudanum, a powdered opium solution, was commonly found in the home medicine cabinet.^[21][22] Heroin was available as a cough syrup.^[23][24][25] Cocaine was introduced as a surgical anesthetic, and more popularly as a pick-me-up, ^[13][14] found in soft drinks, cigarettes, blended with wine, in snuff, and other forms.^[13][14] Brand names arose: Coca-Cola contained cocaine until 1903; Bayer created and trademarked "Heroin" as the name of their diamorphine product.^[20] In the 1890s, the Sears & Roebuck catalog, distributed to millions of American homes, offered a syringe and a small amount of cocaine or heroin for $1.50.^[23][24][25]

By the end of the century, an estimated 1 in 200 Americans were addicted to opiates, 60% of them women, typically white and middle- to upper-class.^[12] Medical journals of the later 1800s were replete with warning against overprescription. As medical advances like the x-ray, vaccines, and germ theory, presented better treatment options, prescribed opiate use began to decline. Meanwhile, opium smoking was popular among Chinese immigrant laborers, who established opium dens in Chinatowns in cities and towns across America. The public face of opiate use and addiction changed, from affluent white Americans, to “Chinese, gamblers, and prostitutes.”^[12]

During this period, some states enacted laws banning or regulating certain drugs.^[26] San Francisco lead the way with an anti-opium ordinance in 1875, vigorously enforced, imposing stiff fines and jail for visiting opium dens. The rationale held that "many women and young girls, as well as young men of a respectable family, were being induced to visit the Chinese opium-smoking dens, where they were ruined morally and otherwise." The law was racial in nature, one of the measures catering to resentment towards the Chinese laborer population who were being accused of taking jobs; no other uses of opiates or other drugs were affected. Similar laws were enacted in other states and cities. The federal government became involved, raising the import tariff on the grade of opium prepared for smoking. None of these measures proved effective in significantly reducing opium use.^[27] (The anti-Chinese fervor lead to Congress enacting the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, putting a 10-year stop to Chinese laborer immigration.^[28])

1909–1971: Rise of federal drug regulation and prohibition

On February 9, 1909, Public Law No. 221, the Smoking Opium Exclusion Act, "to prohibit the importation and use of opium for other than medicinal purposes", became the first federal law to ban the non-medical use of a substance.^[26][29][30] This was soon followed by the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act of 1914, that regulated and taxed the production, importation, and distribution of opiates and coca products.^[31][32]

During World War I many soldiers were treated with morphine and became addicted.^[12]

In 1919, the U.S. passed the 18th Amendment, prohibiting the sale, manufacture, and transportation of alcohol, with exceptions for religious and medical use, and the National Prohibition Act, informally known as the Volstead Act, to carry out the provisions in the 18th Amendment. Federal prohibition for alcohol was repealed by passage of the 21st Amendment in 1933.

Amending the Smoking Opium Exclusion Act, the Anti-Heroin Act of 1924 made it illegal to manufacture, import or sell heroin.^[18]

The Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN) was established as an agency of the US Department of the Treasury by an act of June 14, 1930,^[33] with Harry J. Anslinger as the founding commissioner, a position he held for 32 years, until 1962.^[34] He supported Prohibition and the criminalization of all drugs, and spearheaded anti-drug policy campaigns.^[35] According to Anslinger, opium poppy fields contained “as much potential disaster as an atom bomb”.^[36] He has been characterized as an early proponent of the war on drugs, as he zealously advocated for and pursued harsh drug penalties, in particular regarding cannabis.^[37]

In 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt publicly supported the adoption of the Uniform State Narcotic Drug Act; the New York Times used the headline "Roosevelt Asks Narcotic War Aid".^[38][39] The Narcotic Drug Act addressed the 1914 Harrison Act's lack of state-level enforcement provisions. The Harrison Act was a taxation act, while it provided penalties for violations, it did not give authority to the states to exercise police power regarding either seizure of drugs used in illicit trade or punishment of those responsible.^[40]

With the passage of the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937,^[41] cannabis joined opiates and cocaine as the most prohibited drugs. That year, the first two arrests for tax non-payment, for possession of a quarter-ounce (7g), and trafficking of four pounds (1.8 kg), resulted in sentences of nearly 18 months and four years respectively.^[42] The American Medical Association (AMA) had opposed the tax on grounds that it unduly affected the medical use of cannabis. The AMA's legislative counsel testified that the claims about cannabis addiction, violence and overdoses were not supported.^[43][44] Scholars have posited that the Act was orchestrated by powerful business interests – Andrew Mellon, Randolph Hearst, and the Du Pont family – to head off cheap competition from the hemp industry: Mellon was invested in DuPont's new synthetic plastic, nylon; Hearst was involved with pulp and timber.^{[45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][Note 1]}

In 1944, the LaGuardia Committee report, the first US in-depth study of cannabis use, systematically contradicted government claims, finding that cannabis is not physically addictive, not a gateway drug, and its use does not lead to crime. The Committee was formed in 1939 by New York Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia, an opponent of the Marihuana Tax Act.^[59][60] The FBN's Anslinger branded the study "unscientific", denounced all involved, from LaGuardia to the researching physicians, and interrupted other cannabis studies at the time.^[61]

Drugs as a growing political issue, penalties get harsher

In the early 1950s, "white suburban grassroots movements" at state level were pushing liberal politicians to crack down on drugs. California, Illinois, and New York passed the first mandatory minimums for drug offenses; Congress soon followed.^[62] In 1951, Congress changed its approach to mandatory minimum penalties: their number, length, and the scope of crimes they covered all increased. According to the United States Sentencing Commission, reporting in 2012: "Before 1951, mandatory minimum penalties typically punished offenses concerning treason, murder, piracy, rape, slave trafficking, internal revenue collection, and counterfeiting. Today, the majority of convictions under statutes carrying mandatory minimum penalties relate to controlled substances, firearms, identity theft, and child sex offenses.".^[63]

In 1961, 64 countries initially signed on to the United Nations' Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, a treaty that unified all the international drug agreements then in existence.^[64] In the US, the treaty was ratified and came into force in 1967.^[65] The Single Convention became the first of three treaties that currently form the legal framework for international drug control.^[66][67]

In 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969) decided that the government needed to make an effort to curtail the social unrest that blanketed the country at the time. He decided to focus his efforts on illegal drug use, an approach that was in line with expert opinion on the subject at the time. In the 1960s, it was believed that at least half of the crime in the U.S. was drug-related, and this number grew as high as 90 percent in the next decade.^[68] He created the Reorganization Plan of 1968 which merged the Bureau of Narcotics and the Bureau of Drug Abuse Control to form the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs within the Department of Justice.^[69]

The Richard Nixon presidency (1969-1974) did not back away from the anti-drug precedent set by his predecessor. In his 1968 presidential nominee acceptance speech, Nixon's tough-on-crime pledge promised, "Our new Attorney General will ... launch a war against organized crime in this country. ... will be an active belligerent against the loan sharks and the numbers racketeers that rob the urban poor. ... will open a new front against the filth peddlers and the narcotics peddlers who are corrupting the lives of the children of this country."^[70][71] In a 1969 special message to Congress, he identified drug abuse as "a serious national threat".^[72][73]

On October 27, 1970, Nixon signed into law the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970. Under the Act, simple possession was reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor, the first offense carried a maximum of one year in prison, and judges had the latitude to assign probation, parole or dismissal. Penalties for trafficking were increased, up to life depending on quantity and type of drug. Funding was authorized for the Department of Health, Education and Welfare to provide treatment, rehabilitation and education. Additional federal drug agents were provided, and a "no-knock" power was instituted, that allowed entry into homes without warning to prevent evidence from being destroyed. Licensing and stricter reporting and record-keeping for drug manufacturers and distributors would occur under the Act.^[74] Title II of Act, the Controlled Substances Act, established five drug Schedules, categories based on medical value and potential for abuse.^[75]

1971–present: The "War on Drugs"

On May 27, 1971, after a trip to Vietnam, two congressmen, Morgan F. Murphy (Democrat) and Robert H. Steele (Republican), released a report describing a "rapid increase in heroin addiction within the United States military forces in South Vietnam". They estimated that "as many as 10 to 15 percent of our servicemen are addicted to heroin in one form or another."^{[76][75][77][78]} On June 6, a New York Times article, "It's Always A Dead End On 'Scag Alley'", cited the Murphy-Steele report in a discussion of heroin addiction. The article stated that, in the US, "the number of addicts is estimated at 200,000 to 250,000, only about one‐tenth of 1 per cent of the population but troublesome out of all proportion." It also noted, "Heroin is not the only drug problem in the United States. 'Speed' pills—among them, amphetamines—are another problem, and not least in the suburbs where they are taken by the housewife (to cure her of the daily 'blues') and by her husband (to keep his weight down)."^[79]

On June 17, 1971, Nixon presented to Congress a plan for expanded anti-drug abuse measures. He painted a dire picture: "Present efforts to control drug abuse are not sufficient in themselves. The problem has assumed the dimensions of a national emergency. ... If we cannot destroy the drug menace in America, then it will surely in time destroy us." His strategy involved both prevention and treatment: "I am proposing the appropriation of additional funds to meet the cost of rehabilitating drug users, and I will ask for additional funds to increase our enforcement efforts to further tighten the noose around the necks of drug peddlers, and thereby loosen the noose around the necks of drug users." He singled out heroin and broadened the scope beyond the US: "To wage an effective war against heroin addiction, we must have international cooperation. In order to secure such cooperation, I am initiating a worldwide escalation in our existing programs for the control of narcotics traffic."^[80]

Later the same day, Nixon held a news conference at the White House, where he described increasing drug use in the US as "public enemy number one." He announced, "In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive. … This will be a worldwide offensive. … It will be government-wide … and it will be nationwide." Nixon pledged to ask Congress for a minimum of $350 million for the anti-drug effort (when he took office in 1969, the federal drug budget was $81 million).^[81]

Nixon began orchestrating drug raids nationwide to improve his "watchdog" reputation. Lois B. Defleur, a social historian who studied drug arrests during this period in Chicago, stated that, "police administrators indicated they were making the kind of arrests the public wanted". Additionally, some of Nixon's newly created drug enforcement agencies would resort to illegal practices to make arrests as they tried to meet public demand for arrest numbers. From 1972 to 1973, the Office of Drug Abuse and Law Enforcement performed 6,000 drug arrests in 18 months, the majority of the arrested black.^[82]

In 1973, the Drug Enforcement Administration was created to replace the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs.^[75] The Nixon administration also repealed the federal 2 to 10-year mandatory minimum sentences for possession of marijuana and started federal demand reduction programs and drug-treatment programs. Robert DuPont, the "drug czar" in the Nixon Administration, stated it would be more accurate to say that Nixon ended, rather than launched, the "war on drugs". DuPont also argued that it was the proponents of drug legalization that popularized the term "war on drugs".^{[83][unreliable source?]}

Decades later, a controversial quote attributed to John Ehrlichman, Nixon's domestic policy advisor, claimed that the war on drugs was fabricated to undermine the anti-war movement and African-Americans. In a 2016 Harper's cover story, Ehrlichman, who died in 1999,^[84] was quoted from journalist Dan Baum's 1994 interview notes: "... by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."^{[85][86][87][88]} The "alleged 'quote'" was challenged by his family, and several Nixon-era officials.^[89] In the end, the increasingly punitive reshaping of US drug policy by later administrations was most responsible for creating conditions such as Ehrlichman described.^[90]

The war on drugs under the next two presidents, Gerald Ford (1974-1977) and Jimmy Carter (1977-1981), was essentially a continuation of their predecessors' policies. Carter's campaign platform included decriminalization of cannabis and an end to federal penalties for possession of up to one ounce.^[72] In a 1977 "Drug Abuse Message to the Congress", Carter stated, "Penalties against possession of a drug should not be more damaging to an individual than the use of the drug itself." None of his advocacy was translated into law.^[91][92]

Reagan escalation, crack crackdown, and "Just Say No"

The presidency of Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) saw an increase in federal focus on prevention and prosecution. Shortly after his inauguration, Reagan announced, "We're taking down the surrender flag that has flown over so many drug efforts; we're running up a battle flag."^[93] From 1980 to 1984, the federal annual budget of the FBI's drug enforcement units went from eight million to 95 million.^[94][95] In 1982, Vice-President George H. W. Bush and his aides began pushing for the involvement of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and US military in drug interdiction efforts.^[96]

Early in the Reagan term, First Lady Nancy Reagan, with the help of an advertising agency, began her youth-oriented "Just Say No" anti-drug campaign. Propelled by the First Lady's tireless promotional efforts through the 1980s, "Just Say No" entered the American vernacular. Later research found that the campaign had little or no impact on youth drug use.^[97][98][99] One striking change attributed to the effort: public perception of drug abuse as America's most serious problem, in the 2-6% range in 1985, rose to 64% in 1989.^[100]

In 1984, Reagan signed the Comprehensive Crime Control Act, which included harsher penalties for cannabis cultivation, possession, and distribution, and established equitable sharing, a new civil asset forfeiture program that allowed state and local law enforcement to share the proceeds from asset seizures made in collaboration with federal agencies.^[101][102] Under the controversial program, up to 80% of seizure proceeds can go to local law enforcement, expanding their budgets. By 2019^[update], $36.5 billion worth of assets had been seized, much of it drug-related.^[103]

As the media focused on the emergence of crack cocaine, the Reagan administration shored up negative public opinion, encouraging the DEA to play up the harmful effects of the drug. Stories of "crack whores" and "crack babies" became commonplace.^[104] In the summer of 1986, crack dominating the news. Time declared crack the issue of the year.^[104] Newsweek compared the magnitude of the crack story to Vietnam and Watergate.^[105] The cocaine overdose deaths of rising basketball star Len Bias, and young NFL football player Don Rogers,^[106] both in June, received wide coverage.^[105] Riding the wave of public fervor, that October Reagan signed into law much harsher sentencing for crack through the Anti-Drug Abuse Act.^[107] According to historian Elizabeth Hinton, "[Reagan] led Congress in criminalizing drug users, especially African American drug users, by concentrating and stiffening penalties for the possession of the crystalline rock form of cocaine, known as 'crack', rather than the crystallized methamphetamine that White House officials recognized was as much of a problem among low-income white Americans".^[108]

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act appropriated an additional $1.7 billion to drug war funding, and established 29 new mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses (until then, the American legal system had seen 55 minimum sentences in total).^[109] Most notably, the Act made sentences for crack 100 times more severe than for powder cocaine. With the 100:1 ratio, conviction in federal court for possession of 5 grams of crack would receive the same 5-year mandatory minimum as possession of 500 grams of powder cocaine.^[110][111] Public debate at the time considered whether crack, generally used by blacks, was more powerful and addictive than the powder form, generally used by whites;^[104] pharmacologically, there is no difference between the two.^[112] Compared to inhaling the powdered form, crack is smoked, providing a briefer, more intense high, similar to injecting or freebasing powder cocaine, that could pose a greater risk of dependency.^[113] According to the DEA, at first crack "was not fully appreciated as a major threat because it was primarily being consumed by middle class users who were not associated with cocaine addicts ... However, partly because crack sold for as little as $5 a rock, it ultimately spread to less affluent neighborhoods."^[114]

Support for Reagan's crime legislation was bipartisan. According to Hinton, Democrats supported his legislation as they had since the Johnson administration,^[108] though Reagan was a Republican.

Hard line maintained

Next to occupy the Oval Office, Reagan protégé and former VP George H. W. Bush (1989-1993) maintained the hard line drawn by his predecessor and former boss. In his first prime-time address to the nation, Bush held up a plastic bag of crack "seized a few days ago in a park across the street from the White House" (turned out that DEA agents had to lure the seller to Lafayette Park to make the requested arrest).^[115] The administration increased narcotics regulation in the first National Drug Control Strategy, issued by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) in 1989.^[116] The director of ONDCP became commonly known as the US drug czar.^[75]

 

Mexican troops during a gun battle in Michoacán, 2007. Mexico's drug war claims nearly 50,000 lives each year.^{[citation needed]}

As president, Bill Clinton (1993-2001) dramatically raised the stakes for drug felonies with his signing of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The Act introduced the federal "three-strikes" provision that mandated life imprisonment for violent offenders with two prior convictions for violent crimes or drugs, and provided billions of dollars in funding for states to expand their prison systems and increase law enforcement.^[117] During this period, state and local government initiated controversial drug legislation, policies that demonstrated racial biases such as the stop-and-frisk police practice in New York City, and state-level "three strikes" felony laws, which began California in 1994.^[118]

The George W. Bush (2001-2009) administration maintained the hard line approach.^[119] In a TV interview in February 2001, Bush's new Attorney General, John Ashcroft, said about the war on drugs, "I want to renew it. I want to refresh it, relaunch it if you will."^[120] In 2001, after 9/11 and the Patriot Act, the DEA began promoting the tie between drug trafficking and international terrorism, gaining the agency expanded funding to increase its global presence.^[121]

Growing dissent

 

The US incarceration rate peaked in 2008. The US rate was the highest in the world in 2008. Chart is for prisoners per 100,000 population of all ages.^[122][123]

 

US timeline graphs of number of people incarcerated in jails and prisons.^[124]

In the summer of 2001, a report by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), "The Drug War is the New Jim Crow", tied the vastly disproportionate rate of African American incarceration to the range of rights lost once convicted. It stated that, while "whites and blacks use drugs at almost exactly the same rates ... African-Americans are admitted to state prisons at a rate that is 13.4 times greater than whites, a disparity driven largely by the grossly racial targeting of drug laws." Between federal and state laws, those convicted of even simple possession could lose the right to vote, eligibility for educational assistance including loans and work-study programs, custody of their children, and personal property including homes. The report concluded that the cumulative affect of the war on drugs amounted to "the US apartheid, the new Jim Crow".^[120] This view was further developed by lawyer and civil rights advocate Michelle Alexander in her 2010 book, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness.^[125]

During his time in office, Barack Obama (2009-2017) implemented a "tough but smart" approach to the war on drugs. While he claimed that his method differed from those of previous presidents, in reality, his practices were similar.^[126] In May 2009, Gil Kerlikowske, Director of the ONDCP – Obama's drug czar – indicated that the Obama administration did not plan to significantly alter drug enforcement policy, but that it would not use the term "war on drugs", considering it to be "counter-productive".^[127] In August 2010, Obama signed the Fair Sentencing Act into law, reducing the 100:1 sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine to 18:1.^[128][129]

In 2011, the Global Commission on Drug Policy, an international non-governmental group composed primarily of former heads of state and government, released a report that stated, "The global war on drugs has failed." It recommended a paradigm shift, to a public health focus, with decriminalization for possession and personal use.^[130] Obama's ONDCP did not support the report, stating: "Drug addiction is a disease that can be successfully prevented and treated. Making drugs more available ... will make it harder to keep our communities healthy and safe."^[83]

 

California Attorney General Kamala Harris visiting the U.S.–Mexico border on March 24, 2011, to discuss strategies to combat drug cartels

In May 2012, the ONDCP published "Principles of Modern Drug Policy", broadly focusing on public health, human rights, and criminal justice reform, while targeting drug traffickers.^[131] According to the ONDCP director, drug legalization is not the "silver bullet" solution to drug control, and success is not measured by the number of arrests made or prisons built.^[132] That month, a joint statement, "For a humane and balanced drug policy", was signed by Italy, the Russian Federation, Sweden, the UK and the US, promoting a combination of "enforcement to restrict the supply of drugs, with efforts to reduce demand and build recovery."^[133] Meanwhile, at the state level, 2012 saw Colorado and Washington become the first two states to legalize the recreational use of cannabis with the passage of Amendment 64 and Initiative 502.^[134]

A 2013 ACLU report declared the anti-marijuana crusade a "war on people of color". The report found that "African Americans [were] 3.73 times more likely than whites to be apprehended despite nearly identical usage rates, and marijuana violations accounting for more than half of drug arrests nationwide during the previous decade".^[126] Under Obama's policies, nonwhite drug offenders received less excessive criminal sanctions, but by examining criminals as strictly violent or nonviolent, mass incarceration persisted.^[126]

In March 2016 the International Narcotics Control Board stated that the UN's international drug treaties do not mandate a "war on drugs" and that the choice is not between "'militarized' drug law enforcement on one hand and the legalization of non-medical use of drugs on the other", health and welfare should be the focus of drug policy^[135]

Under President Donald Trump (2017-2021), Attorney General Jeff Sessions reversed his predecessor's drug position, and instructed federal prosecutors to “charge and pursue the most serious, readily provable offense” in drug cases, regardless of whether mandatory minimum sentences applied. This amounted to encouraging prison time even for simple cannabis possession.^[136][137] With cannabis legalized to some degree in nearly 30 states, Sessions' directive was seen by both Democrats and Republicans as a rogue throwback action, and there was a bipartisan outcry. Trump fired Sessions in 2018, over other issues.^[138]

In 2020, both the ACLU and The New York Times reported that Republicans and Democrats were in agreement that it was time to end the war on drugs. While on the presidential campaign trail, President Joe Biden (2020-current) claimed that he would take the steps to alleviate the drug war and end the opioid epidemic.^[139][140]

Some partial policy reversal attempts and successes

On December 4, 2020, under the Biden administration, the House of Representatives passed the Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act (MORE Act), which would decriminalize cannabis at the federal level by removing it from the list of scheduled substances, expunge past convictions and arrests, and tax cannabis to "reinvest in communities targeted by the war on drugs".^[139][141] The MORE Act was received in the Senate in December 2020 where it remained.^[142]

Over time, states in the US have approached drug liberalization at a varying pace. As of December 2020^[update], Oregon became the first state to decriminalize all drugs, shifting from a criminal approach to a public health approach.^[139] As of September 2023^[update], over 30 states had decriminalized cannabis to some degree, split about equally between recreational and medical-only use. Decriminalization in this context usually refers to first-time offenses and small quantities, such as, in the case of cannabis, under an ounce (28g).^[143]

In 2022, the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act was signed into law to allow cannabis to be more easily researched for medical purposes. It is the first standalone cannabis reform bill enacted at the federal level.^{[144][145][146]}

In 2023, the US State Department announced plans to launch a "global coalition to address synthetic drug threats", with more than 80 countries expected to join.^{[147][148][149]} That April, Anne Milgram, head of the DEA since 2021, stated to Congress that two Mexican drug cartels posed "the greatest criminal threat the United States has ever faced." Supporting a DEA budget request of $3.7 billion for 2024, Milgram cited fentanyl in the "most devastating drug crisis in our nation’s history."^[150][151]

Foreign intervention

 

Colin Powell, then the United States Secretary of State, visiting Colombia in the early 2000s as part of the United States' support of Plan Colombia^{[152][153][154][155][156]}

During the 1970s, the US treated drugs as a policing issue. Billions of dollars were given to support anti-drug activity by police forces in Latin American countries, including Colombia, Peru and Bolivia. Beginning in the 1980s, the US increasingly involved the military and private security firms, to provide training and support to armed forces in drug-producing and transit countries.^[157]

Some scholars have claimed that the phrase "War on Drugs" is propaganda cloaking an extension of earlier military or paramilitary operations.^[5] Others have argued that large amounts of "drug war" foreign aid money, training, and equipment actually goes to fighting leftist insurgencies and is often provided to groups who themselves are involved in large-scale narco-trafficking, such as corrupt members of the Colombian military.^[4]

Latin America

In 2021, Gustavo Gorriti, journalist and founder of IDL-Reporteros, investigating corruption in Peru, wrote a scathing editorial in the Washington Post on the impact of 50 years of the war on drugs on Latin America. He described the flow of drugs to the US as an "unstoppable industry" that triggered an economic revolution throughout the region, where the illegal drug trade with its high profit margins far exceeded the potential of legitimate businesses. Corruption among politicians and anti-drug forces soared, even as those in charge were "cultivating close relationships with U.S. enforcement and intelligence agencies." An underclass of poor farmers became economic hostages, depending on drug crops for their survival. The big winners were "the systems built to wage a fight that they soon realized would have no end. ... [The war on drugs] became a source for endless resources, inflated budgets, contracts, purchase orders, power, influence — new economies battling drug trafficking but also dependent on it."^[158]

At a meeting in Guatemala in 2012, three former presidents from Guatemala, Mexico and Colombia said that the war on drugs had failed and that they would propose a discussion on alternatives, including decriminalization, at the Summit of the Americas in April of that year.^[159] Guatemalan President Otto Pérez Molina said that the war on drugs was exacting too high a price on the lives of Central Americans and that it was time to "end the taboo on discussing decriminalization".^[160] At the summit, the government of Colombia pushed for the most far-reaching change to drugs policy since the war on narcotics was declared by Nixon four decades prior, citing the catastrophic effects it had had in Colombia.^[161]

Colombia

Main articles: Plan Colombia and Paramilitarism in Colombia

Through the Plan Colombia program, between 2000 and 2015, the US provided Colombia with $10 billion in funding,^[162][163] primarily for military aid, training, and equipment,^[164] to fight left-wing guerrillas such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC-EP), which has been accused of being involved in drug trafficking.^[165] The Clinton administration initially waived all but one of the human rights conditions attached to Plan Colombia, considering such aid as crucial to national security at the time.^[166] Private US military contractors, including the former DynCorp, the largest private company involved, were contracted by the State Department and Defense Department, to carry out anti-drug initiatives as part of Plan Colombia.^[167]

Colombian military personnel received extensive counterinsurgency training from US military and law enforcement agencies, including the School of Americas (SOA). Author Grace Livingstone has stated that more Colombian SOA graduates have been implicated in human rights abuses than currently known SOA graduates from any other country.^{[citation needed]} All of the commanders of the brigades highlighted in a 2001 Human Rights Watch report on Colombia were graduates of the SOA, including the III brigade in Valle del Cauca, where the 2001 Alto Naya Massacre occurred. US-trained officers have been accused of being directly or indirectly involved in many massacres during the 1990s, including the Trujillo Massacre and the 1997 Mapiripán Massacre.^{[citation needed]}

The efforts of U.S. and Colombian governments have been criticized for focusing on fighting leftist guerrillas in southern regions without applying enough pressure on right-wing paramilitaries and continuing drug smuggling operations in the north of the country.^[168][169] Human Rights Watch, congressional committees and other entities have documented the existence of connections between members of the Colombian military and the AUC, which the U.S. government has listed as a terrorist group, and that Colombian military personnel have committed human rights abuses which would make them ineligible for U.S. aid under current laws.^{[citation needed]}

A report by the RAND Corporation, examining the Colombian experience for insights applicable to the Mexican drug war, noted that "Plan Colombia has been widely hailed as a success, and some analysts believe that, by 2010, Colombian security forces had finally gained the upper hand once and for all." The report cited dramatic reductions in kidnappings and terrorist acts, and the recapture of territory, attributed to "a reinforced military and reinvigorated police force." It also found that, as of 2010, "Colombia is still a major source country for illicit narcotics. Moreover, the state continues to share sovereignty with a range of violent nonstate actors, including rebel groups and rightwing paramilitaries allied with drug traffickers and wealthy landowners."^[170] The Washington Office on Latin America concluded in 2010 that both Plan Colombia and the Colombian government's security strategy "came at a high cost in lives and resources, only did part of the job, are yielding diminishing returns and have left important institutions weaker."^[171]

Mexico

One of the first anti-drug efforts in the realm of foreign policy was President Nixon's Operation Intercept, announced in September 1969, targeted at reducing the amount of cannabis entering the United States from Mexico. The effort began with an intense inspection crackdown that resulted in an almost shutdown of cross-border traffic.^[172] Because the burden on border crossings was controversial in border states, the effort only lasted twenty days.^[173]

The Mérida Initiative, launched in 2008, was a security cooperation program between the US and Mexico, aimed at combating drug trafficking and transnational crime. From 2008 to 2021, the US provided $3.5 billion in funding. The initial focus was anti-drug and rule-of-law measures, later broadened to include US-Mexico border activities. Components included military and law enforcement training and equipment, and technical advice and training to strengthen the national justice systems. In 2021, it was replaced by the Bicentennial Framework for Security, Public Health, and Safe Communities.^[174]

In 2013, a Pew Research Center poll found that 85% of Mexican citizens supported using the Mexican army against drug cartels, 74% supported US training assistance for their police and military, 55% supported the supplying of weapons and financial aid, and 59% were against deploying US troops on Mexican soil.^[175] Anti-drug efforts were seen as making progress by 37%, losing ground by 29%, and staying the same by 30%; 56% believed that the US and Mexico are both to blame for drug violence in Mexico.^[176]

Nicaragua

Senator John Kerry's 1988 U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations report on Contra drug links concludes that members of the U.S. State Department "who provided support for the Contras are involved in drug trafficking... and elements of the Contras themselves knowingly receive financial and material assistance from drug traffickers."^[177] The report further states that "the Contra drug links include... payments to drug traffickers by the U.S. State Department of funds authorized by the Congress for humanitarian assistance to the Contras, in some cases after the traffickers had been indicted by federal law enforcement agencies on drug charges, in others while traffickers were under active investigation by these same agencies."

Panama

Main articles: Operation Just Cause and Operation Nifty Package

 

The U.S. military invasion of Panama in 1989

On December 20, 1989, the US invaded Panama with 25,000 American troops, as part of Operation Just Cause, to depose and arrest the Panamanian head of government, Gen. Manuel Noriega. Noriega had been giving military assistance to Contra groups in Nicaragua at the request of the US, which in turn tolerated his drug trafficking activities, known since the 1960s.^[178][179] The CIA prevented the DEA from indicting him in 1971 and, under the directoriship of future president George H. W. Bush, provided Noriega with hundreds of thousands of dollars annually as payment for his work in Latin America.^[178] When CIA pilot Eugene Hasenfus was shot down over Nicaragua by the Sandinistas, documents aboard the plane revealed many of the CIA's Latin American activities, making the agency's connection with Noriega a public relations liability for the US. The DEA was finally permitted to indict him for drug trafficking, after decades of tolerating his drug operations.^[178] Operation Just Cause and Nifty Package were launched to capture Noriega and overthrow his government. He surrendered to US soldiers on January 3, 1990,^[180] and was sentenced by a US court to 45 years in prison.^[178] The United Nations General Assembly resolved that the invasion was a "flagrant violation of international law."^[181]

Ecuador

Main article: War on drugs in Ecuador

The war on drugs in Ecuador has intensified since 2018.^[182] It culminated in a wider conflict breaking out in 2024.^[183]

Honduras

In 2012, the U.S. sent DEA agents to Honduras to assist security forces in counternarcotics operations. Honduras has been a major stop for drug traffickers, who use small planes and landing strips hidden throughout the country to transport drugs. The U.S. government made agreements with several Latin American countries to share intelligence and resources to counter the drug trade. DEA agents, working with other U.S. agencies such as the State Department, the CBP, and Joint Task Force-Bravo, assisted Honduras troops in conducting raids on traffickers' sites of operation.^[184]

 

Mexico is scheduled to receive US$1.6 billion in equipment and strategic support from the United States through the Mérida Initiative.

Aerial herbicide application

Main article: Plan Colombia § Fumigation strategy and criticisms

The United States regularly sponsors the spraying of large amounts of herbicides such as glyphosate over the jungles of Central and South America as part of its drug eradication programs. Environmental consequences resulting from aerial fumigation have been criticized as detrimental to some of the world's most fragile ecosystems;^[185] the same aerial fumigation practices are further credited with causing health problems in local populations.^[186]

Impact on growers

The coca eradication policy has been criticised for its negative impact on the livelihood of coca growers in South America. In many areas of South America the coca leaf has traditionally been chewed and used in tea and for religious, medicinal and nutritional purposes by locals.^[187] For this reason many insist that the illegality of traditional coca cultivation is unjust. In many areas, the US government and military forced the eradication of coca, at the same time destroying other food or market crops, without providing for any alternative, leaving farmers starving and destitute.^[187] In Bolivia, president Evo Morales (2006-2019), a former coca growers' union leader, promised to legalize the traditional cultivation and use of coca. His legalization efforts, combined with aggressive and targeted eradication efforts, lead to some success, using coca growers' federations to ensure compliance with the law rather than deploying security forces; a 12–13% decline in coca cultivation was noted in 2011.^[188]

Domestic impact

The social consequences of the drug war have been widely criticized by such organizations as the ACLU as being racially biased against minorities and disproportionately responsible for the exploding United States prison population. According to a report commissioned by the Drug Policy Alliance, and released in March 2006 by the Justice Policy Institute, America's "Drug-Free Zones" are ineffective at keeping youths away from drugs, and instead create strong racial disparities in the judicial system.^[189]

Several critics have compared the wholesale incarceration of the dissenting minority of drug users to the wholesale incarceration of other minorities in history. Psychiatrist Thomas Szasz, for example, wrote in 1997 "Over the past thirty years, we have replaced the medical-political persecution of illegal sex users ('perverts' and 'psychopaths') with the even more ferocious medical-political persecution of illegal drug users."^[190]

Incarceration

According to Human Rights Watch, the War on Drugs caused soaring arrest rates that disproportionately targeted African Americans due to various factors.^[191] Anti-drug and tough-on-crime policies from the 1970s through the 1990s created a situation where the US, with less than 5% of the world population, houses nearly 25% of the world's prisoners. As of 2015^[update], the US prison population rate was 716 per 100,000 people, the highest in the world, six times higher than Canada and six to nine times higher than Western European countries.^[192]

 

Graph demonstrating increases in United States incarceration rate

In the 1980s, while the number of arrests for all crimes had risen by 28%, the number of arrests for drug offenses rose 126%.^[193] Increased demand lead to the development of privatization and the for-profit prison industry.^[194]

Reporting on the effects of state initiatives, the Department of Justice found that, from 1990 through 2000, "the increasing number of drug offenses accounted for 27% of the total growth among black inmates, 7% of the total growth among Hispanic inmates, and 15% of the growth among white inmates." In 1994, the New England Journal of Medicine reported that the war on drugs resulted in the incarceration of one million Americans each year.^[195]

In 2008, The Washington Post reported that of 1.5 million Americans arrested each year for drug offenses, half a million would be incarcerated, and one in five black Americans would spend time behind bars due to drug laws.^[196] In addition to prison or jail, the US provides for the deportation of many non-citizens convicted of drug offenses.^[197]

Federal and state policies also impose collateral consequences on those convicted of drug offenses, separate from fines and prison time, that are not applicable to other types of crime.^[198] In order to comply with a federal law known as the Solomon–Lautenberg amendment, a number of states require a six-months driver's license suspension for anyone convicted of a drug offense.^{[199][200][201]} Other examples of collateral consequences for drug offenses, or for felony offenses in general, include loss of professional license, loss of ability to purchase a firearm, loss of eligibility for food stamps, loss of eligibility for Federal Student Aid, loss of eligibility to live in public housing, loss of ability to vote, and deportation.^[198]

Prison overcrowding

One consequence of the war on drugs policy has been the overcrowding of prisons within the United States. The policy's approach to prosecuting drug-related offenses has led to a surge in incarcerated individuals for nonviolent drug offenses. As a result, many prisons have become overburdened, often operating at capacities far beyond their intended limits. Overcrowding not only strains the prison system itself but also raises questions about the effectiveness of incarceration as a solution to drug-related issues.^[202] Resources that could be allocated to address the root causes of drug abuse, provide rehabilitation and treatment programs, or support communities affected by drug-related issues are instead diverted to managing the burgeoning prison population. This reallocation of resources away from preventive measures and treatment options undermines the potential for a comprehensive and holistic approach to addressing drug-related challenges. Critics argue that focusing solely on incarceration fails to address the underlying social factors contributing to drug abuse and perpetuates a cycle of criminality without offering pathways to recovery and reintegration into society.^[203]

Racial disparities in sentencing

Main article: Race and the War on Drugs

Racial disparities have been a prominent and contentious aspect of the "War on Drugs" in the US. In 1957, the belief at the time about drug use was summarized by journalist Max Lerner in his work, America as a Civilization: "As a case in point we may take the known fact of the prevalence of reefer and dope addiction in Negro areas. This is essentially explained in terms of poverty, slum living, and broken families, yet it would be easy to show the lack of drug addiction among other ethnic groups where the same conditions apply."^[204]

The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 created a 100:1 sentencing disparity in the U.S. for the trafficking or possession of crack when compared to penalties for trafficking of powder cocaine.^{[205][110][111][206]} The bill had been widely criticized as discriminatory against minorities, mostly blacks, who were more likely to use crack than powder cocaine.^[207] In 1994, studying the effects of the 100:1 sentencing ratio, the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) found that nearly two-thirds of crack users were white or Hispanic, while nearly 85% of those convicted for possession were black, with similar numbers for trafficking. Powder cocaine offenders were more equally divided across race. The USSC noted that these disparities resulted in African Americans serving longer prison sentences than other ethnicities. In a 1995 report to Congress, the USSC recommended against the 100:1 sentencing ratio.^[208][209] In 2010, the 100:1 sentencing ratio was reduced to 18:1.^[207][129]

Other studies indicated similarly dramatic racial differences in enforcement and sentencing. Statistics from 1998 show that there were wide racial disparities in arrests, prosecutions, sentencing and deaths. African-American drug users made up for 35% of drug arrests, 55% of convictions, and 74% of people sent to prison for drug possession crimes.^[110] Nationwide African-Americans were sent to state prisons for drug offenses 13 times more often than other races,^[210] even though they supposedly constituted only 13% of regular drug users.^[110] Human Rights Watch's report, "Race and the Drug War" (2000), provided extensive documentation of racial disparities, citing statistics and case studies highlighting the unequal treatment of racial and ethnic groups by law enforcement agencies, particularly in drug arrests.^[211] According to the report, in the US in 1999, compared to non-minorities, African Americans were far more likely to be arrested for drug crimes, and received much stiffer penalties and sentences.^[212]

In Malign Neglect – Race Crime and Punishment in America (1995), University of Minnesota professor and social justice author Michael Tonry wrote, "The War on Drugs foreseeably and unnecessarily blighted the lives of hundreds and thousands of young disadvantaged black Americans and undermined decades of effort to improve the life chances of members of the urban black underclass."^[213]

In her 2010 book, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, Michelle Alexander underscored the profound impact of drug policies on minority communities. The book argues that the "War on Drugs" has effectively perpetuated a racial caste system, with African American and Hispanic individuals experiencing disproportionately high rates of arrest, conviction, and incarceration for drug-related offenses. Alexander contends that this system functions as a modern form of racial control, stripping individuals of their rights and opportunities, and reinforcing societal inequalities.^[214] The consequences of these racial disparities extend beyond criminal justice, affecting economic opportunities, access to education, and overall social mobility for affected individuals and communities.^[214] As such, discussions around racial disparities in the "War on Drugs" have played a pivotal role in shaping public discourse and policy reform efforts aimed at addressing these issues.^[211]

 

D.C. Mayor Marion Barry captured on a surveillance camera smoking crack cocaine during a sting operation by the FBI and D.C. Police

Public opinion

Further information: Arguments for and against drug prohibition

 

A US government domestic public interest poster c. 2000 concerning cannabis in the United States

In the 21st century, according to polling, a majority of Americans have been skeptical about the methods and effectiveness of the war on drugs. A national poll in 2008 found that three in four Americans believed that the drug war was failing.^[215] In 2014, a Pew Research Center poll found found that 67% of Americans feel that a movement towards treatment for drugs like cocaine and heroin is better versus 26% who feel that prosecution is the better route. Moving away from mandatory prison terms for drug crimes was favored by two-thirds of the population, a substantial shift from a fifty-fifty for-against split in 2001. A large majority saw alcohol as a greater danger to health (69%) and society (63%) than cannabis.^[216][217] In 2018, a Rasmussen Reports poll found that less than 10% of Americans think that the war on drugs is being won.^[218]

Socioeconomic effects

Permanent underclass creation

 

Approximately 1 million people are incarcerated every year in the United States for drug law violations.

Penalties for drug crimes among American youth almost always involve permanent or semi-permanent removal from opportunities for education, strip them of voting rights, and later involve creation of criminal records which make employment more difficult. One-fifth of the US prison population are incarcerated for a drug offence.^[219] Thus, some authors maintain that the War on Drugs has resulted in the creation of a permanent underclass of people who have few educational or job opportunities, often as a result of being punished for drug offenses which in turn have resulted from attempts to earn a living in spite of having no education or job opportunities.^[220][221]

Costs to taxpayers

According to a 2008 study published by Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron, the annual savings on enforcement and incarceration costs from the legalization of drugs would amount to roughly $41.3 billion, with $25.7 billion being saved among the states and over $15.6 billion accrued for the federal government. Miron further estimated at least $46.7 billion in tax revenue based on rates comparable to those on tobacco and alcohol: $8.7 billion from marijuana, $32.6 billion from cocaine and heroin, and $5.4 billion from other drugs.^[222]

Drug testing in the workplace

Workplace drug testing has been widespread and controversial in the US since the late 1980s: there is no clear measure of its effectiveness in improving safety and productivity, and testing affects significantly more non-whites than whites. Testing is more prevalent in the US than elsewhere in the world.^[223] Most common is urine analysis for amphetamines, cocaine, marijuana, opioids and PCP;^[224] (a criticism is that there is usually no practical discrimination between the effects of the different drugs^[223]). Testing rapidly gained popularity after the Reagan administration in 1986 mandated that all federal workers be tested. According to surveys, workplace testing peaked in 1996, with 81% of companies reporting drug screening, up from 21% in 1987.^[225][223]

In the1980s, testing had been promoted to business as a way to reclaim huge losses in productivity caused by drug use. Studies released in the 1990s refuted these claims; a 1994 report from the National Academy of Sciences, "Under the Influence? Drugs and the American Work Force“, concluded that "the data... do not provide clear evidence of the deleterious effects of drugs other than alcohol on safety and other job performance indicators.” By 2004, workplace testing was down to 62% of companies,^[225] in 2015, it was reported as below 50%. Meanwhile, statistics are still available that assert significant productivity losses, and testing is common.^[223]

In 2021, drug testing began to be cut back, to improve hiring prospects in a tight labor market. Amazon, America's second largest employer, eliminated cannabis testing in job pre-screening, where not required by government regulations, stating, "Pre-employment marijuana testing has disproportionately affected communities of color by stalling job placement." In a survey of 45,000 companies worldwide, 9% reported the elimination of testing in order to improve hiring.^[226]

Legality

Main article: Legality of the War on Drugs

The legality of drug prohibition within the US has been challenged on various grounds. One argument holds that drug prohibition, as presently implemented, violates the substantive due process doctrine in that its benefits do not justify the encroachments on rights that are supposed to be guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.^[227][228] Another argument interprets the Commerce Clause to mean that drugs should be regulated in state law not federal law.^{[citation needed]} A third argument states that the reverse burden of proof in drug-possession cases is incompatible with the rule of law, in that the power to convict is effectively taken from the courts and given to those who are willing to plant evidence.^[229]

Efficacy

There is no clear measure of the effectiveness of the war on drugs, instead, a collection of, at times conflicting, claims by government and critics, academic studies, public opinion, news reports, and a mixture of statistics.

Thirty years into the campaign, a National Research Council report, "Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs" (2001), found that existing studies on efforts to address drug usage and smuggling, from US military operations to eradicate coca fields in Colombia, to domestic drug treatment centers, have all been inconclusive, if the programs had been evaluated at all: "The existing drug-use monitoring systems are strikingly inadequate to support the full range of policy decisions that the nation must make. ... It is unconscionable for this country to continue to carry out a public policy of this magnitude and cost without any way of knowing whether and to what extent it is having the desired effect."^[230][231]

 

USS Rentz (FFG-46) attempts to put out a fire set by drug smugglers trying to escape and destroy evidence.

External videos
A Conversation with President Obama and David Simon (The Wire creator), discussing The Wire and the War on Drugs, The White House^[232]

In 1986, the US Defense Department funded a two-year study by the RAND Corporation, which found that the use of the armed forces to interdict drugs coming into the United States would have little or no effect on cocaine traffic and might, in fact, raise the profits of cocaine cartels and manufacturers. Released in 1988, the study, Sealing the Borders: The Effects of Increased Military Participation in Drug Interdiction, noted that seven prior studies, including one by the Center for Naval Research and the Office of Technology Assessment, had come to similar conclusions. Interdiction efforts, using current armed forces resources, would have almost no effect on cocaine importation into the United States, the report concluded.^[233]

During the 1990s, the Clinton administration commissioned a major cocaine policy study by the RAND Drug Policy Research Center. The report recommended that $3 billion be switched from federal and local law enforcement to treatment, concluding that treatment is the cheapest way to cut drug use, and twenty-three times more effective than the supply-side war on drugs.^[234]

In mid-1995, the US government tried to reduce the supply of methamphetamine precursors to disrupt the market of this drug. According to a 2009 study, this effort was successful, but its effects were largely temporary.^[235]

During alcohol prohibition, the period from 1920 to 1933, alcohol use initially fell but began to increase as early as 1922. It has been extrapolated that even if prohibition had not been repealed in 1933, alcohol consumption would have surpassed pre-prohibition levels. One argument against the war on drugs is that it uses similar measures as Prohibition and is no more effective.^[236]

In the six years from 2000 to 2006, the U.S. spent $4.7 billion on Plan Colombia, an effort to eradicate coca production in Colombia. The main result of this effort was to shift coca production into more remote areas and force other forms of adaptation. The overall acreage cultivated for coca in Colombia at the end of the six years was found to be the same, after the U.S. Drug Czar's office announced a change in measuring methodology in 2005 and included new areas in its surveys.^[237] Cultivation in the neighboring countries of Peru and Bolivia increased, some would describe this effect like squeezing a balloon.^[238]

Richard Davenport-Hines, in his book The Pursuit of Oblivion, criticized the efficacy of the War on Drugs by pointing out that "10–15% of illicit heroin and 30% of illicit cocaine is intercepted. Drug traffickers have gross profit margins of up to 300%. At least 75% of illicit drug shipments would have to be intercepted before the traffickers' profits were hurt."^[239]

Alberto Fujimori, president of Peru from 1990 to 2000, described U.S. foreign drug policy as "failed": "For 10 years, there has been a considerable sum invested by the Peruvian government and another sum on the part of the American government, and this has not led to a reduction in the supply of coca leaf offered for sale. Rather, in the 10 years from 1980 to 1990, it grew 10-fold."^[240]

In 2007, "An Open Letter to the President, Congress, Governors, and State Legislatures" signed by over 550 economists, including Nobel Laureates Milton Friedman, George Akerlof and Vernon L. Smith, endorsed the findings of a 2005 paper, "The Budgetary Implications of Marijuana Prohibition," by economist Jeffrey Miron. Comparing the cost of drug prohibition to the tax revenue if cannabis was taxed as regular consumer good, or similarly to alcohol, the letter stated: "The fact that marijuana prohibition has these budgetary impacts does not by itself mean prohibition is bad policy. Existing evidence, however, suggests prohibition has minimal benefits and may itself cause substantial harm. We therefore urge the country to commence an open and honest debate about marijuana prohibition. We believe such a debate will favor a regime in which marijuana is legal but taxed and regulated like other goods."^[241]

 

US yearly overdose deaths, and the drugs involved. There were around 110,500 drug overdose deaths overall in 2022 in the US.^[242]

The declaration from the World Forum Against Drugs, 2008 state that a balanced policy of drug abuse prevention, education, treatment, law enforcement, research, and supply reduction provides the most effective platform to reduce drug abuse and its associated harms and call on governments to consider demand reduction as one of their first priorities in the fight against drug abuse.^[243]

Despite over $7 billion spent annually towards arresting^[244] and prosecuting nearly 800,000 people across the country for marijuana offenses in 2005^{[citation needed]} (FBI Uniform Crime Reports), the federally funded Monitoring the Future Survey reports about 85% of high school seniors find marijuana "easy to obtain". That figure has remained virtually unchanged since 1975, never dropping below 82.7% in three decades of national surveys.^[245] The DEA states that the number of users of marijuana in the US declined between 2000 and 2005, even with many states passing new medical marijuana laws making access easier,^[246] though usage rates remain higher than they were in the 1990s according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health.^[247]

ONDCP stated in April 2011 that there has been a 46% drop in cocaine use among young adults over the past five years, and a 65% drop in the rate of people testing positive for cocaine in the workplace since 2006.^[248] At the same time, a 2007 study found that up to 35% of college undergraduates used stimulants not prescribed to them.^[249]

A 2013 study found that prices of heroin, cocaine and cannabis had decreased from 1990 to 2007, but the purity of these drugs had increased during the same time.^[250][251]

According to data collected by the Federal Bureau of Prisons 45.3% of all criminal charges were drug related and 25.5% of sentences for all charges last 5–10 years. Furthermore, non-whites make up 41.4% of the federal prison system's population and over half are under the age of 40.^[252] The Bureau of Justice Statistics contends that over 80% of all drug related charges are for possession rather than the sale or manufacture of drugs.^[253] In 2015 The U.S. government spent over to $25 billion on supply reduction, while allocating only $11 billion for demand reduction. Supply reduction includes: interdiction, eradication, and law enforcement; demand reduction includes: education, prevention, and treatment. The war on drugs is often called a policy failure.^{[254][255][256][257][258][259]}

Critics of the war on drugs have noted that strict drug scheduling and mandatory minimum sentences have done little to reduce the number of deaths caused by drug use. According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), drug abuse deaths in 2021 reached an all-time high of 108,000 deaths,^[260] a 15% increase from 2020 (93,000)^[261] which, at the time, was the highest number of deaths and a 30% increase from 2019, .^[260]

In 2023, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights denounced the failure of punitive drug policies and the global War on Drugs, and called for a new approach based on health and human rights, including through the legal regulation of drugs.^[262][263]

Alternatives

See also: Responsible drug use

A prevalent critical view holds that the war on drugs has been costly and ineffective largely because US federal and state governments have chosen the wrong methods, focusing on interdiction and punishment rather than regulation and treatment. The US leads the world in both recreational drug usage and incarceration rates; 70% of men arrested in metropolitan areas test positive for an illicit substance,^[264] and 54% of all men incarcerated will be repeat offenders.^[265] Aggressive, heavy-handed enforcement funnels individuals through courts and prisons; instead of treating the cause of the addiction. Making drugs illegal rather than regulating them also creates a highly profitable black market. Jefferson Fish has edited scholarly collections of articles offering a wide variety of public health-based and rights-based alternative drug policies.^{[266][267][268]}

In a survey taken by Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), it was found that substance abusers that remain in treatment longer are less likely to resume their former drug habits. Of the people that were studied, 66 percent were cocaine users. After experiencing long-term in-patient treatment, only 22 percent returned to the use of cocaine. Treatment had reduced the number of cocaine abusers by two-thirds.^[269]

In the year 2000, the United States drug-control budget reached 18.4 billion dollars,^[269] nearly half of which was spent financing law enforcement while only one sixth was spent on treatment. In the year 2003, 53 percent of the requested drug control budget was for enforcement, 29 percent for treatment, and 18 percent for prevention.^[270] The state of New York, in particular, designated 17 percent of its budget towards substance-abuse-related spending. Of that, a mere one percent was put towards prevention, treatment, and research.

As an alternative to imprisonment, drug courts in the US identify substance-abusing offenders and place them under strict court monitoring and community supervision, as well as provide them with long-term treatment services.^[271] According to a report issued by the National Drug Court Institute, drug courts have a wide array of benefits, with only 16.4 percent of the nation's drug court graduates rearrested and charged with a felony within one year of completing the program (versus the 44.1% of released prisoners who end up back in prison within one year). Additionally, enrolling an addict in a drug court program costs much less than incarcerating one in prison.^[272] According to the Bureau of Prisons, the fee to cover the average cost of incarceration for Federal inmates in 2006 was $24,440.^[273] The annual cost of receiving treatment in a drug court program ranges from $900 to $3,500. Drug courts in New York State alone saved $2.54 million in incarceration costs.^[272]

Considering outright legalization of recreational drugs, New York Times columnist Eduardo Porter noted: "Jeffrey Miron, an economist at Harvard who studies drug policy closely, has suggested that legalizing all illicit drugs would produce net benefits to the United States of some $65 billion a year, mostly by cutting public spending on enforcement as well as through reduced crime and corruption. A study by analysts at the RAND Corporation, a California research organization, suggested that if marijuana were legalized in California and the drug spilled from there to other states, Mexican drug cartels would lose about a fifth of their annual income of some $6.5 billion from illegal exports to the United States."^[274]

See also

• Baker, a series of counter-narcotics training exercises conducted by the United States Army and several Asian countries
• Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue
• Chasing the Scream
• Civil forfeiture in the United States
• Class war
• Cognitive liberty
• Crack epidemic
• Drugs in the United States
• Harm reduction
• Latin American drug legalization
• Law Enforcement Action Partnership
• November Coalition
• Philippine Drug War
• Prison-industrial complex
• Race war
• Recreational use of drugs
• Smoke and Mirrors: The War on Drugs and the Politics of Failure
• Victimless crime
• War on Gangs

Covert activities and foreign policy

• Allegations of CIA drug trafficking
• Golden Crescent
• Golden Triangle
• Harry J. Anslinger
• Military Cooperation with Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies Act
• CIA transnational anti-crime and anti-drug activities
• Plan Colombia
• UMOPAR
• Air Bridge Denial Program

Government agencies and laws

• Continuing Criminal Enterprise
• Marijuana Control, Regulation, and Education Act
• Office of National Drug Control Policy
• United Nations Drug Control Programme

Notes

1. Despite media reports at the time touting hemp as the new wonder fiber, harvesting and processing technology weren't sufficiently developed to compete commercially.^[57][58]

References

1. War on Drugs. The Global Commission on Drug Policy. 2011. p. 24. from the original on January 9, 2016. Retrieved September 18, 2017.
2. Baum, Writer Dan. "Legalize All Drugs? The 'Risks Are Tremendous' Without Defining The Problem". NPR.org. from the original on January 15, 2018. Retrieved April 3, 2018.
3. "(And) Richard Nixon was the one who coined the phrase, 'war on drugs.'"
4. Cockburn and St. Clair, 1998: Chapter 14
5. Bullington, Bruce; Block, Alan A. (March 1990). "A Trojan horse: Anti-communism and the war on drugs". Crime, Law and Social Change. 14 (1): 39–55. doi:10.1007/BF00728225. ISSN 1573-0751. S2CID 144145710.
6. Mann, Brian (June 17, 2021). "After 50 Years Of The War On Drugs, 'What Good Is It Doing For Us?'". NPR. Retrieved December 8, 2023.
7. "Richard Nixon: Special Message to the Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control". from the original on December 12, 2013. Retrieved December 8, 2013.
8. "Nixon Calls War on Drugs". Palm Beach Post. June 18, 1971. Retrieved December 8, 2023.
9. Dufton, Emily (March 26, 2012). "The War on Drugs: How President Nixon Tied Addiction to Crime". The Atlantic. from the original on November 5, 2012. Retrieved October 13, 2012.
10. "Drug War Statistics". Drug Policy Alliance. from the original on July 5, 2017. Retrieved February 25, 2014.
11. Mann, Brian (June 17, 2021). "After 50 Years Of The War On Drugs, 'What Good Is It Doing For Us?'". NPR. The campaign  – which by some estimates cost more than $1 trillion  – also exacerbated racial divisions and infringed on civil liberties in ways that transformed American society.
12. Trickey, Erick (January 4, 2018). "Inside the Story of America's 19th-Century Opiate Addiction". The Smithsonian. from the original on January 5, 2019. Retrieved December 25, 2023.
13. Das, G (April 1993). "Cocaine abuse in North America: a milestone in history". Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 33 (4): 296–310. doi:10.1002/j.1552-4604.1993.tb04661.x. PMID 8473543. S2CID 9120504 – via PubMed.
14. "Cocaine". History.com. August 21, 2018. Retrieved December 15, 2023.
15. Rorabaugh, W.J. (1981). The Alcohol Republic: An American Tradition. Oxford University Press. pp. 20–21. ISBN 978-0-1950-2990-1.
16. Aaron, Paul; Musto, David (1981). Temperance and Prohibition in America: A Historical Overview. Retrieved February 11, 2024. {{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
17. "Marijuana Timeline". PBS Frontline. Retrieved December 15, 2023.
18. "Heroin, Morphine and Opiates". history.com. June 10, 2019. Retrieved March 28, 2021.
19. Courtwright DT (2009). Forces of habit drugs and the making of the modern world. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. pp. 36–37. ISBN 978-0674029903. from the original on 8 September 2017.
20. McKendry, Joe (March 2019). "Sears Once Sold Heroin". The Atlantic. Retrieved December 25, 2023.
21. The Editorial Board (April 21, 2018). "Opinion – An Opioid Crisis Foretold". The New York Times. from the original on January 22, 2019. Retrieved January 21, 2019.
22. "The United States War on Drugs". web.stanford.edu. from the original on January 6, 2019. Retrieved January 21, 2019.
23. Cockburn, Alexander; Jeffrey St. Clair (1998). Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs and the Press. Verso. ISBN 1-85984-139-2.
24. Johnston, Ann Dowsett (November 15, 2013). "'Drink' and 'Her Best-Kept Secret'". The New York Times. Retrieved August 9, 2023. In 1897, the Sears, Roebuck catalog offered a kit with a syringe, two needles, two vials of heroin and a handy carrying case for $1.50.
25. "Sears Once Sold Heroin". The Atlantic. January 30, 2019. Retrieved August 9, 2023. For $1.50, Americans around the turn of the century could place an order through a Sears, Roebuck catalog and receive a syringe, two needles, and two vials of Bayer Heroin, all in a handsome carrying case.
26. "War on Drugs". History.com. May 31, 2017. Retrieved December 8, 2023.
27. Brecher, Edward M. (1972). "Licit and Illicit Drugs: The Consumers' Union Report on Narcotics, Stimulants, Depressants, Inhalants, Hallucinogens, and Marijuana—Including Caffeine, Nicotine, and Alcohol". Consumers Union. Retrieved February 10, 2024.
28. Lee, Erika (2002). "The Chinese Exclusion Example: Race, Immigration, and American Gatekeeping, 1882-1924". Journal of American Ethnic History. 21 (3): 36–62. doi:10.2307/27502847. JSTOR 27502847. S2CID 157999472.
29. "Opium prohibition law in library of congress" (PDF). Library of Congress. Retrieved May 14, 2019.
30. "Opium and Narcotic Laws". Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved December 8, 2023.
31. "Opium Throughout History". PBS Frontline. from the original on September 23, 2006. Retrieved October 8, 2010.
32. "Harrison Narcotics Tax Act, 1914". Drug Reform Coordination Network. Retrieved November 18, 2013.
33. "Records of the Drug Enforcement Administration DEA". Archives.gov. from the original on May 21, 2011. Retrieved March 27, 2011.
34. Filan, Kenaz (February 23, 2011). The Power of the Poppy: Harnessing Nature's Most Dangerous Plant Ally. Rochester, Vt.: Park Street Press. p. 64. ISBN 978-1-59477-399-0.
35. Krebs, Albin (November 18, 1975). Sulzberger Sr., Arthur Ochs (ed.). "Harry J. Anslinger Dies at 83; Hard-Hitting Foe of Narcotics". The New York Times. Vol. CXXIV, no. 236. p. 40. Retrieved September 10, 2021. Harry J. Anslinger, an implacable, hard-hitting foe of drug pushers and users during the 32 years he was the Treasury Department's Commissioner of Narcotics, died Friday in Hollidaysburg, Pa. His age was 83.
36. Smith, Benjamin T. (June 2021). "Why we should remember Richard Nixon's war on drugs". History Extra. Retrieved January 6, 2024.
37. Chasin, Alexandra (September 30, 2016). Assassin of Youth: A Kaleidoscopic History of Harry J. Anslinger's War on Drugs. Chicago, Illinois, United States of America: University of Chicago Press. doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226277028.001.0001. ISBN 9780226276977. LCCN 2016011027. Retrieved September 10, 2021 – via Google Books.
38. "Roosvelt Asks Narcotics War Aid, 1935". Druglibrary.net. from the original on July 23, 2011. Retrieved March 27, 2011.
39. "Letter to the World Narcotic Defense Association. March 21, 1935". Presidency.ucsb.edu. from the original on February 3, 2012. Retrieved March 27, 2011.
40. Joiney, Hi. "Legal history of cannabis in the United States – rotary drilling rigs Manufacturer". Retrieved February 15, 2011.
41. For repeal, see section 1101(b)(3), Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, Pub. L. No. 91-513, 84 Stat. 1236, 1292 (Oct. 27, 1970) (repealing the Marihuana Tax Act which had been codified in Subchapter A of Chapter 39 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954).
42. Glick, Daniel (December 6, 2016). "80 Years Ago This Week, Marijuana Prohibition Began With These Arrests". Leafly.
43. "Statement of Dr. William C. Woodward, Legislative Counsel, American Medical Association". Retrieved March 25, 2006.
44. Committee on Finance, U.S. Senate, 75c 2s. HR6906. Library of Congress transcript. July 12, 1937
45. French, Laurence; Manzanárez, Magdaleno (2004). NAFTA & neocolonialism: comparative criminal, human & social justice. University Press of America. p. 129. ISBN 978-0-7618-2890-7. from the original on December 28, 2019. Retrieved May 7, 2020.
46. Earlywine, 2005: p. 24 January 10, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
47. Peet, 2004: p. 55
48. Evans, Sterling (2007). Bound in twine: the history and ecology of the henequen-wheat complex for Mexico and the American and Canadian Plains, 1880–1950. Texas A&M University Press. p. 27. ISBN 978-1-58544-596-7. from the original on April 24, 2016. Retrieved March 6, 2016.
49. Evans, Sterling, ed. (2006). The borderlands of the American and Canadian Wests: essays on regional history of the forty-ninth parallel. University of Nebraska Press. p. 199. ISBN 978-0-8032-1826-0.
50. Gerber, Rudolph Joseph (2004). Legalizing marijuana: drug policy reform and prohibition politics. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 7. ISBN 978-0-275-97448-0. from the original on January 8, 2016. Retrieved March 6, 2016.
51. Earleywine, Mitchell (2005). Understanding marijuana: a new look at the scientific evidence. Oxford University Press. p. 231. ISBN 978-0-19-518295-8. from the original on January 8, 2016. Retrieved March 6, 2016.
52. Robinson, Matthew B. & Scherlen, Renee G. (2007). Lies, damned lies, and drug war statistics: a critical analysis of claims made by the office of National Drug Control Policy. SUNY Press. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-7914-6975-0. from the original on January 8, 2016. Retrieved March 6, 2016.
53. Rowe, Thomas C. (2006). Federal narcotics laws and the war on drugs: money down a rat hole. Psychology Press. p. 26. ISBN 978-0789028082. from the original on January 8, 2016. Retrieved March 6, 2016.
54. Sullivan, Larry E.; et al., eds. (2005). Encyclopedia of Law Enforcement: Federal. Sage. p. 747. ISBN 978-0761926498. from the original on January 8, 2016. Retrieved March 6, 2016.
55. Lusane, Clarence (1991). Pipe dream blues: racism and the war on drugs. South End Press. pp. 37–38. ISBN 978-0896084100.
56. "Was there a conspiracy to outlaw hemp because it was a threat to theDuPonts and other industrial interests?". from the original on April 2, 2015. Retrieved March 17, 2015.
57. LH, Dewey (1943). "Fiber production in the western hemisphere". United States Printing Office, Washington. p. 67. from the original on March 13, 2016. Retrieved February 25, 2015.
58. Fortenbery, T. Randall; Bennett, Michael (July 2001). "Is Industrial Hemp Worth Further Study in the US? A Survey of the Literature" (PDF). Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison. p. 25. (PDF) from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved June 25, 2014.
59. Downs, David (April 19, 2016). "The Science behind the DEA's Long War on Marijuana". Scientific American. Retrieved January 31, 2024.
60. HARRY J. ANSLINGER: The Murderers THE STORY OF THE NARCOTIC GANGS, 1962
61. Jack Herer. 1985. The Emperor Wears No Clothes. Ah Ha Publishing, Van Nuys, CA.
62. Lassiter, Matthew D. (December 7, 2023). "America's War on Drugs Has Always Been Bipartisan—and Unwinnable". Time. Retrieved December 21, 2023.
63. United States Sentencing Commission (2012). "Report to Congress: Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal Criminal Justice System" (PDF). Federal Sentencing Reporter. 24 (3): 28 – via JSTOR. As detailed herein, beginning in 1951, Congress changed how it used mandatory minimum penalties in three significant ways. First, Congress enacted more mandatory minimum penalties. Second, Congress expanded its use of mandatory minimum penalties to offenses not traditionally covered by such penalties. Before 1951, mandatory minimum penalties typically punished offenses concerning treason, murder, piracy, rape, slave trafficking, internal revenue collection, and counterfeiting. Today, the majority of convictions under statutes carrying mandatory minimum penalties relate to controlled substances, firearms, identity theft, and child sex offenses. Third, the mandatory minimum penalties most commonly used today are generally lengthier than mandatory minimum penalties in earlier eras.
64. Hilotin-Lee, J.D., Lyle Therese A. (October 20, 2023). "The Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs". FindLaw. Retrieved December 15, 2023.
65. "Message to the Senate Transmitting the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961". The American Presidency Project - UC Santa Barbara. Retrieved December 18, 2023.
66. "Conventions". Transnational Institute. Retrieved December 15, 2023.
67. "Treaties". United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Retrieved December 15, 2023.
68. James Inciardi, The War on Drugs IV, ed. 4. (Delaware: Pearson Allyn and Bacon, 2008), 286.
69. Andrew B. Whitford and Jeffrey Yates, Presidential Rhetoric and the Public Agenda (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009), 40.
70. ""Law and Order" in Richard Nixon 1968 Presidential acceptance speech". C-SPAN. August 30, 2008. Retrieved January 8, 2024.
71. Newell, Walker (April 26, 2013). "The Legacy of Nixon, Reagan, and Horton: How The Tough On Crime Movement Enabled A New Regime Of Race Influenced Employment Discrimination" (PDF). Berkeley Journal of African-American Law & Policy. Retrieved February 8, 2024.
72. "Timeline: America's War on Drugs". NPR. April 2, 2007. Retrieved December 5, 2023.
73. Payan, Tony; Staudt, Kathleen; Kruszewski, Z. Anthony (2013). A War that Can't Be Won. University of Arizona Press. p. 180.
74. "Nixon Signs Drug Abuse Control Bill". New York Times. Associated Press. October 28, 1970. Retrieved December 13, 2023.
75. Thirty Years of America's Drug War, a Chronology February 24, 2011, at the Wayback Machine. Frontline (U.S. TV series).
76. Murphy, Morgan F.; Steele, Robert H. (May 27, 1971). "The World Heroin Problem". Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved December 14, 2023.
77. WGBH educational foundation. Interview with Dr. Robert Dupoint September 5, 2017, at the Wayback Machine. Pbs.org (February 18, 1970).
78. Timeline: America's War on Drugs March 29, 2018, at the Wayback Machine. April 2, 2007. NPR.
79. Buckley, Tom (June 6, 1971). "It's Always A Dead End on "Scag Alley"". New York Times. Retrieved December 14, 2023.
80. Nixon, Richard (June 17, 1971). "Special Message to the Congress on Drug Abuse Prevention and Control". UC Santa Barbara - The American Presidency Project. Retrieved December 13, 2023.
81. Farber, David (June 17, 2021). "The War on Drugs turns 50 today. It's time to make peace". Washington Post. Retrieved December 12, 2023.
82. Whitford and Yates. Presidential Rhetoric and the Public Agenda 47
83. Global Commission on Drug Policy Offers Reckless, Vague Drug Legalization Proposal, Institute for Behavior and Health, Inc, July 12, 2011 July 26, 2011, at the Wayback Machine. (PDF).
84. "John D. Ehrlichman Dead At 73". CBS News. February 15, 1999. Retrieved January 6, 2024.
85. "Dan Baum – Harper's Magazine". harpers.org. from the original on July 30, 2017. Retrieved July 30, 2017. The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.
86. "Home – Dan Baum Writer". www.danbaum.com. from the original on January 26, 2017. Retrieved February 7, 2017.
87. Linkins, Jason (June 8, 2009). "Dan Baum, Fired By New Yorker, Recounting His Story On Twitter". from the original on February 19, 2019. Retrieved February 20, 2020 – via Huff Post.
88. Lopez, German (March 22, 2016). "Nixon official: real reason for the drug war was to criminalize black people and hippies". Vox. from the original on May 30, 2017. Retrieved June 13, 2017.
89. LoBianco, Tom (March 24, 2016). "Report: Aide says Nixon's war on drugs targeted blacks, hippies". CNN. Retrieved December 19, 2023.
90. Lopez, German (March 29, 2016). "Was Nixon's war on drugs a racially motivated crusade? It's a bit more complicated". Vox. Retrieved January 6, 2024. Ehrlichman's claim is likely an oversimplification, according to historians who have studied the period and Nixon's drug policies in particular. There's no doubt Nixon was racist, and ... race could have played one role in Nixon's drug war. ... he [also] personally despised drugs — to the point that it's not surprising he would want to rid the world of them. And there's evidence that Ehrlichman felt bitter and betrayed by Nixon after he spent time in prison over the Watergate scandal, so he may have lied. ... More importantly, Nixon's drug policies did not focus on the kind of criminalization that Ehrlichman described. Instead, Nixon's drug war was largely a public health crusade — one that would be reshaped into the modern, punitive drug war we know today by later administrations, particularly President Ronald Reagan.
91. Sullum, Jacob (June 17, 2011). "Did Jimmy Carter End the War on Drugs?". Reason. Retrieved December 19, 2023.
92. Carter, Jimmy (August 2, 1977). "Drug Abuse Message to the Congress". The American Presidency Project - UC Santa Barbara. Retrieved December 19, 2023.
93. Whitford and Yates. Presidential Rhetoric and the Public Agenda, 58.
94. Beckett, Katherine (1997). Making Crime Pay: Law and Order in Contemporary American Politics (1999 Revised ed.). London: Oxford University Press. pp. 52–53, 167. ISBN 0195136268.
95. 98th Congress, 1st Session. Federal Budget of United States Government, 1984. Federal Reserve of Saint Louis. p. 451.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
96. Scott and Marshall, 1991: p. 2
97. Stuart, Tessa (March 7, 2016). "Pop-Culture Legacy of Nancy Reagan's 'Just Say No' Campaign". Rolling Stone. Retrieved December 29, 2023.
98. Lilienfeld, Scott O.; Arkowitz, Hal (January 1, 2014). "Why "Just Say No" Doesn't Work". Scientific American. Retrieved December 29, 2023.
99. "Just Say No". History.com. August 21, 2018. Retrieved December 29, 2023.
100. Tarricone, Jackson (September 10, 2020). "Richard Nixon and the Origins of the War on Drugs". Boston Political Review. Retrieved January 17, 2024.
101. Thurmond, Strom (September 25, 1984). "S.1762 – 98th Congress (1983–1984): Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984". www.congress.gov. from the original on June 27, 2019. Retrieved June 26, 2019.
102. JOHN ENDERS (ASSOCIATED PRESS) (April 18, 1993). "Forfeiture Law Casts a Shadow on Presumption of Innocence : Legal system: Government uses the statute to seize money and property believed to be linked to narcotics trafficking. But critics say it short-circuits the Constitution". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved October 11, 2014. ....Prosecutors and law enforcement officials insist the program, included in the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, is helping them fight the drug war. ... seizures hurt dealers where it counts--in the pocketbook....
103. Freivogel, William (February 18, 2019). "No Drugs, No Crime and Just Pennies for School: How Police Use Civil Asset Forfeiture". Pulitzer Center. Retrieved February 13, 2024.
104. Michelle Alexander. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. (New York: The New Press, 2010), 51.
105. Gelber, Jonathan (June 29, 2021). "How Len Bias's death helped launch the US's unjust war on drugs". The Guardian. Retrieved December 18, 2023.
106. Rogers' death is a second warning
107. Whitford and Yates. Presidential Rhetoric and the Public Agenda, 61.
108. Hinton, Elizabeth. "From the War on Crime to the War on Drugs". From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: the Making of Mass Incarceration in America, by Elizabeth Hinton, Harvard University Press, 2017, pp. 307–332.
109. Jesse Ventura. American Conspiracies (New York: Skyshore Publishing, 2010), 117.
110. Burton-Rose (ed.), 1998: pp. 246–247
111. Elsner, Alan (2004). Gates of Injustice: The Crisis in America's Prisons. Saddle River, New Jersey: Financial Times Prentice Hall. p. 20. ISBN 978-0-13-142791-4.
112. "Cocaine and crack drug profile". European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. Retrieved January 29, 2024.
113. Hatsukami, DK; Fischman, MW (November 20, 1996). "Crack cocaine and cocaine hydrochloride. Are the differences myth or reality? JAMA. 1996 Nov 20;276(19):1580-8. PMID: 8918856". JAMA. 276 (19): 1580–1588. doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03540190052029. PMID 8918856. Retrieved January 29, 2024.
114. "DEA History Book, 1985 - 1990" (PDF). Drug Enforcement Administration. August 23, 2006. from the original on August 23, 2006. Retrieved January 29, 2024.
115. Isikoff, Michael (September 22, 1989). "Drug Buy Set Up For Bush Speech". Washington Post. Retrieved December 12, 2023.
116. Tonry. Malign Neglect – Race, Crime and Punishment in America, 91.
117. Farley, Robert (April 12, 2016). "Bill Clinton and the 1994 Crime Bill". FactCheck.org. Retrieved December 21, 2023.
118. Michelle Alexander. The New Jim Crow – Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, 92
119. Whitford and Yates. Presidential Rhetoric and the Public Agenda. 72
120. Boyd, Graham (2001). "The Drug War Is the New Jim Cro". American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
121. Beith, Malcolm (August 29, 2016). "The DEA's war on narco-terrorism just got more complicated". Vice. Retrieved February 13, 2024.
122. Walmsley, Roy (30 Jan 2009). World Prison Population List (8th Edition). From World Prison Population Lists. By World Prison Brief. "The information is the latest available in early December 2008. … Most figures relate to dates between the beginning of 2006 and the end of November 2008." According to the summary on page one there were 2.29 million U.S. inmates and 9.8 million inmates worldwide. The U.S. held 23.4% of the world's inmates. The U.S. total in this report is for December 31, 2007 (see page 3), and does not include inmates in juvenile detention facilities.
123. Correctional Populations in the United States, 2016 (NCJ 251211). Published April 2018 by U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). By Danielle Kaeble and Mary Cowhig, BJS statisticians. See PDF. Appendix table 1 on page 11 has rates and counts by state. See page 1 "highlights" section for the "1 in ..." numbers. See table 4 on page 4 for a timeline of nationwide incarceration rates. See appendix table 3 on page 13, for "Persons held in custody in state or federal prisons or in local jails, 2000, 2010, and 2015–2016". That table also has incarceration rates. See appendix table 2 on page 12 for the number or persons incarcerated in territorial prisons, military facilities, and jails in Indian country.
124. Jacob Kang-Brown, Chase Montagnet, and Jasmine Heiss. People in Jail and Prison in Spring 2021. New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2021.
125. Remnick, David (January 17, 2020). "Ten Years After 'The New Jim Crow.'". The New Yorker.
126. Lassiter, Matthew. "'Tough and Smart' The Resilience of the War on Drugs During the Obama Administration." The Presidency of Barack Obama: A First Historical Assessment, edited by Julian E. Zelizer, Princeton University Press, 2018, pp. 162–178.
127. Fields, Gary (May 14, 2009). "White House Czar Calls for End to 'War on Drugs'". The Wall Street Journal. from the original on January 1, 2015. Retrieved May 14, 2009.
128. "The Fair Sentencing Act corrects a long-time wrong in cocaine cases" November 20, 2017, at the Wayback Machine, The Washington Post, August 3, 2010. Retrieved September 30, 2010.
129. Bill Summary & Status – 111th Congress (2009–2010) – S.1789 – All Information – THOMAS (Library of Congress) September 22, 2014, at the Wayback Machine. Thomas.loc.gov.
130. "War on Drugs: Report of the Global Commission on Drug Policy" (PDF).
131. Principles of Modern Drug Policy January 23, 2017, at the Wayback Machine. Whitehouse.gov.
132. Statement of the Government of the United States of America World Federation Against Drugs 3rd World Forum, May 21, 2012, Stockholm, Sweden January 23, 2017, at the Wayback Machine. Whitehouse.gov (September 21, 2012).
133. Joint statement For a humane and balanced drug policy, Stockholm 20 May 2012 January 9, 2016, at the Wayback Machine
134. Coffman, Keith; Neroulias, Nicole (November 6, 2012). "Colorado, Washington first states to legalize recreational pot". Reuters. Retrieved February 9, 2018.
135. INCB Report 2015 April 26, 2017, at the Wayback Machine United Nations Information Service 2.3.2016.
136. Beckett, Lois (August 21, 2017). "How Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump have restarted the war on drugs". The Guardian. Retrieved January 14, 2024.
137. Laslo, Matt (January 19, 2018). "Pot Showdown: How Congress Is Uniting to Stop Jeff Sessions' War on Drugs". Rolling Stone. Retrieved January 14, 2024.
138. "Trump fires Attorney General Jeff Sessions". BBC. November 8, 2018. Retrieved January 14, 2024.
139. Ofer, Udi (January 6, 2021). "50 Years Into the War on Drugs, Biden-Harris Can Fix the Harm It Created". American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
140. Kristof, Nicholas (November 7, 2020). "Republicans and Democrats Agree: End the War on Drugs". The New York Times. from the original on June 28, 2021.
141. "Summary: H.R.3617 — 117th Congress (2021-2022)". Congress.gov. April 1, 2022. Retrieved January 28, 2024.
142. Nadler, Jerrold. "H.R.3884 – 116th Congress (2019–2020): MORE Act of 2020." Congress.gov, 7 Dec. 2020, www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/3884. February 10, 2021, at the Wayback Machine
143. "Decriminalization of marijuana in the United States". Leafly. September 23, 2020. Retrieved December 21, 2023.
144. Wadman, Meredith (December 2, 2022). "New U.S. law promises to light up marijuana research". Science Magazine. Retrieved December 3, 2022.
145. Jaeger, Kyle (December 2, 2022). "Biden Signs Marijuana Research Bill, A Historic First For Federal Cannabis Reform". Marijuana Moment. Retrieved December 3, 2022.
146. Fertig, Natalie (November 16, 2022). "Congress sends first weed bill to Biden". Politico. Passage of the legislation signaled a new era in federal cannabis policy: It's the first standalone marijuana-related bill approved by both chambers of Congress.
147. Paun, Carmen; Schumaker, Erin; Leonard, Ben (July 6, 2023). "Wanted: A united front against opioids". POLITICO.
148. Wilkinson, Tracy (July 7, 2023). "Biden administration to launch global coalition to fight fentanyl". Los Angeles Times.
149. "Assistant Secretary for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Todd D. Robinson On the Secretary's Participation in a Virtual Ministerial to Launch the Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats". www.state.gov.
150. MND Staff (April 28, 2023). "DEA: 2 Mexican cartels pose 'greatest criminal threat' ever faced by the US". Mexico News Daily. Retrieved December 21, 2023.
151. Milgram, Anne (April 27, 2023). "Fiscal Year 2024 Request for the Drug Enforcement Administration" (PDF). Drug Enforcement Administration. Retrieved December 21, 2023.
152. "Colombia Program At-A-Glance" (PDF). usaid.gov. United States Agency for International Development. (PDF) from the original on January 9, 2016. Retrieved October 20, 2015.
153. Bennett, Brian (June 9, 2011). "U.S. can't justify its drug war spending, reports say". Los Angeles Times. from the original on September 12, 2018. Retrieved February 20, 2020.
154. . DrugSense. Archived from the original on August 10, 2011. Retrieved November 29, 2021.
155. Vulliamy, Ed (April 3, 2011). "How a big US bank laundered billions from Mexico's murderous drug gangs". The Guardian. London. from the original on December 22, 2016. Retrieved December 18, 2016.
156. Spak, Kevin (June 9, 2011). . Newser. Archived from the original on May 14, 2013. Retrieved November 29, 2021.
157. "Militarization and privatization of security: From the War on Drugs to the fight against organized crime in Latin America". International Review of the Red Cross. June 2023. Retrieved December 31, 2023.
158. Gorriti, Gustavo (June 14, 2021). "It's time to end five decades of strategic fallacy". Washington Post. Retrieved January 6, 2024. When, 50 years ago, President Richard M. Nixon declared drug abuse 'America's public enemy number one' and called for 'an all-out offensive' to defeat it, he mobilized an army of disparate bureaucracies that quickly became ensnared in an inadequate and ineffective metaphor (defeat the 'enemy'). ... The war narrative prevailed, and the biggest winners were the systems built to wage a fight that they soon realized would have no end — but this was a good thing: It became a source for endless resources, inflated budgets, contracts, purchase orders, power, influence — new economies battling drug trafficking but also dependent on it. ... The booming market of potentially dangerous substances flowing from Latin America to the United States became an unstoppable industry. Starting in the mid-1970s, it triggered an economic revolution in the region. ... became a growth sector that put all export industries to shame. ... pioneered a capitalist revolution ... triggering vast inequality and violence. ... The clandestine nature of the industry and its high profit margins elevated political corruption to new heights. There are many examples across the region of those charged with fighting drug trafficking who ended up profiting from it, all while cultivating close relationships with U.S. enforcement and intelligence agencies. ... Beneath ... lies a vast foundation: the cocaine proletariat, farmers from Peru, Bolivia, Colombia, who depend on the crops for survival. Poverty binds them to an industry that offers liquidity and consistent returns, but that also devalues their rights and lives.
159. "Politics this week". The Economist. March 31, 2012. from the original on April 2, 2012. Retrieved April 2, 2012.
160. BBC News – Guatemala's president urges debate on drug legalisation July 6, 2019, at the Wayback Machine. Bbc.co.uk (March 25, 2012).
161. Vulliamy, Ed (April 15, 2012). "Colombia calls for global drugs taskforce". The Observer. from the original on October 16, 2013. Retrieved April 15, 2012.
162. Rampton, Roberta (February 4, 2016). "Obama pledges more than $450 million aid to help Colombia peace plan". Reuters. Retrieved April 8, 2018.
163. Lee, Brendon (January 9, 2020). "Not-So-Grand Strategy: America's Failed War on Drugs in Colombia". Harvard International Review. Retrieved January 17, 2024.
164. "SUMMARY: FY 2010 STATE AND FOREIGN OPERATIONS APPROPRIATIONS" (PDF). U.S. House of Representatives. 2010. Retrieved February 2, 2010.^{[permanent dead link]}
165. Weiser, Benjamin. (September 5, 2012) FARC – Revolutionary Armed forces of Colombia" May 27, 2012, at the Wayback Machine The New York Times.
166. Stokes, Doug (2005). . Zed Books. ISBN 978-1-84277-547-9. Archived from the original on January 9, 2016. p. 99
167. Private Security Transnational Enterprises in Colombia April 17, 2008, at the Wayback Machine José Alvear Restrepo Lawyers' Collective February 2008.
168. Gill, Leslie (2004). The School of the Americas: military training and political violence in the Americas. Duke University Press. p. 180. ISBN 978-0-8223-3392-0.
169. Peet, 2004: p. 61
170. "Mexico Is Not Colombia" (PDF). rand.org. RAND Corporation National Security Research Division. (PDF) from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved October 20, 2015.
171. Washington Office on Latin America "Colombia: Don't Call it a Model" August 4, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, July 13, 2010 Retrieved on May 8, 2010
172. "Operation Intercept: The perils of unilateralism". from the original on April 24, 2009. Retrieved May 14, 2009.
173. "Consumers Union Report on Licit and Illicit Drugs". Druglibrary.org. from the original on May 14, 2011. Retrieved March 27, 2011.
174. Ribando Seelke, Clare (October 9, 2023). "U.S.-Mexico Security Cooperation: From the Mérida Initiative to the Bicentennial Framework" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. Retrieved January 17, 2024.
175. "Mexican public favors military use, U.S. aid to fight drug cartels | Pew Research Center". Pew Research Center. from the original on November 12, 2018. Retrieved October 23, 2018.
176. "U.S. Image Rebounds in Mexico". Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project. April 29, 2013. from the original on November 10, 2018. Retrieved November 1, 2018.
177. Cockburn and St. Clair, 1998:^{[page needed]}
178. Cockburn and St. Clair, 1998: pp. 287–290
179. Buckley, Kevin (1991). Panama: The Whole Story. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-0-671-72794-9.
180. Baker, Russell (January 3, 1990). "OBSERVER; Is This Justice Necessary?". The New York Times Company. from the original on June 16, 2008. Retrieved March 5, 2010.
181. United Nations General Assembly, A/RES/44/240, 88th Plenary Meeting, December 29, 1989 [1]
182. Collyns, Dan (September 12, 2023). "'We should treat it as a war': Ecuador's descent into drug gang violence". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved February 9, 2024.
183. Saviano, Roberto (February 9, 2024). "The world is hungry for cocaine and happy to buy it. But think of the ravaged countries that pay the price". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved February 9, 2024.
184. "A New Front Line in the U.S. Drug War". New York Times. May 31, 2012. from the original on November 29, 2012. Retrieved October 13, 2012.
185. Bowe, Rebecca (2004). "The drug war on the Amazon". E: The Environmental Magazine (Nov–Dec).
186. Rohter, Larry (May 1, 2000). "To Colombians, Drug War is a Toxic Foe". The New York Times.
187. Lindsay, Reed (March 25, 2003). "Bolivian Coca Growers Fight Eradication". Washington Times. from the original on September 10, 2009. Retrieved February 3, 2010.
188. Ledebur, Kathryn; Youngers, Coletta (March 25, 2013). "From Conflict to Collaboration: An Innovative Approach to Reducing Coca Cultivation in Bolivia". Stability: International Journal of Security and Development. 2 (1): Art. 9. doi:10.5334/sta.aw.
189. . Justice Policy Institute. Archived from the original on July 18, 2006. Retrieved July 27, 2006.
190. The Manufacture of Madness: A Comparative Study of the Inquisition and the Mental Health Movement (1997), p. xi
191. "The Impact of the War on Drugs on U.S. Incarceration". Human Rights Watch. May 2000. from the original on November 28, 2008. Retrieved June 10, 2007.
192. Ye Hee Lee, Michelle (April 30, 2015). "Does the United States really have 5 percent of the world's population and one quarter of the world's prisoners?". Washington Post. Retrieved December 30, 2023.
193. Austin J, McVey AD. The 1989 NCCD prison population forecast: the impact of the war on drugs. San Francisco: National Council on Crime and Delinquency, 1989.
194. Development of private prisons in the United States
195. Grinspoon, Lester; Bakalar, James B. (February 3, 1994). "The War on Drugs—A Peace Proposal". New England Journal of Medicine. 330 (5): 357–360. doi:10.1056/NEJM199402033300513. PMID 8043062.
196. Will, George F. (October 29, 2009). "A reality check on drug use". The Washington Post. pp. A19. from the original on October 8, 2017. Retrieved September 18, 2017.
197. Yates, Jeff; Collins, Todd; Chin, Gabriel J. (1995). "A War on Drugs or a War on Immigrants? Expanding the Definition of 'Drug Trafficking' in Determining Aggravated Felon Status for Non-Citizens". Maryland Law Review. 64: 875. Retrieved February 28, 2021.
198. Gabriel J. Chin, "Race, The War on Drugs, and the Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction" April 21, 2008, at the Wayback Machine, v.6 Journal of Gender, Race, Justice p.253 (2002)
199. "States Are Pressed to Suspend Driver Licenses of Drug Users". The New York Times. Associated Press. November 16, 1990. from the original on July 4, 2018. Retrieved May 29, 2018.
200. Aiken, Joshua (December 12, 2016), Reinstating Common Sense: How driver's license suspensions for drug offenses unrelated to driving are falling out of favor, Prison Policy Initiative, retrieved May 29, 2018
201. , Marijuana Policy Project, archived from the original on October 8, 2007
202. "The War on Marijuana in Black and White". American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). June 2013.
203. "The Human Rights Impact of Over-Incarceration in the U.S." (PDF). Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). May 2015.
204. Inciardi, James A (2008). The War on Drugs IV: The Continuing Saga of the Mysteries and Miseries of Intoxication, Addiction, Crime, and Public Policy. Allyn and Bacon. p. 248.
205. Abrams, Jim (July 29, 2010). "Congress passes bill to reduce disparity in crack, powder cocaine sentencing". The Washington Post. from the original on September 5, 2017. Retrieved September 18, 2017.
206. United States Sentencing Commission (2002). (PDF). p. 6. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 15, 2007. Retrieved August 24, 2010. As a result of the 1986 Act ... penalties for a first-time cocaine trafficking offense: 5 grams or more of crack cocaine = five-year mandatory minimum penalty
207. "The Fair Sentencing Act corrects a long-time wrong in cocaine cases" November 20, 2017, at the Wayback Machine, The Washington Post, August 3, 2010. Retrieved September 30, 2010.
208. "A Social History of America's Most Popular Drugs". PBS Frontline. Retrieved December 13, 2023.
209. United States Sentencing Commission (February 1995). "Special Report to the Congress: Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy" (PDF). United States Sentencing Commission. Retrieved December 13, 2023.
210. "Key Findings at a Glance". Racial Disparities in the War on Drugs. Human Rights Watch. from the original on August 16, 2014. Retrieved February 3, 2010.
211. Human Rights Watch (2000). "Race and the Drug War".
212. "I. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS". Punishment and Prejudice: Racial Disparities in the War on Drugs. Human Rights Watch. 2000. from the original on February 7, 2010. Retrieved February 3, 2010.
213. Michael Tonry, Malign Neglect – Race Crime and Punishment in America (London: Oxford University Press, 1995), 82.
214. Alexander, Michelle (2010). The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. The New Press. ISBN 978-1595581037.
215. . Zogby International. October 2, 2008. Archived from the original on February 11, 2010. Retrieved May 10, 2010.
216. "America's New Drug Policy Landscape | Pew Research Center". Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. April 2, 2014. from the original on October 29, 2018. Retrieved October 23, 2018.
217. "New Pew Poll Confirms Americans Ready to End War on Drugs". Drug Policy Alliance. April 1, 2014. Retrieved October 22, 2018.
218. "Voters Have Little Faith in War on Drugs". Rasmussen Reports. January 10, 2018. Retrieved October 22, 2018.
219. Plant, Michael; Singer, Peter (May 4, 2021). "Why drugs should be not only decriminalised, but fully legalised". www.newstatesman.com. Retrieved May 22, 2021.
220. Blumenson, Eric; Nilsen, Eva S. (May 16, 2002). (PDF). Drug Policy Forum of Massachusetts. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 22, 2010. Retrieved August 7, 2011.
221. Newman, Tony (January 3, 2013). "Connecting the Dots: 10 Disastrous Consequences of the Drug War". HuffPost. from the original on June 23, 2019. Retrieved July 5, 2019.
222. Miron, Jeffrey A. & Waldock, Katherine (2010). "The Budgetary Impact of Ending Drug Prohibition" (PDF). CATO.org. (PDF) from the original on May 12, 2013. Retrieved May 15, 2013.
223. Engber, Daniel (December 27, 2015). "Why Do Employers Still Routinely Drug-Test Workers?". Slate. Retrieved January 24, 2024.
224. "Drug Testing". National Institutes of Health. November 21, 2023. Retrieved January 24, 2024.
225. DePillis, Lydia (March 10, 2015). "Companies drug test a lot less than they used to — because it doesn't really work". Washington Post. Retrieved January 24, 2024.
226. McCluskey, Megan (October 20, 2021). "Amid a Labor Shortage, Companies Are Eliminating Drug Tests. It's a Trend That Could Create More Equitable Workplaces". TIME. Retrieved January 24, 2024.{{cite magazine}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
227. Redlich, Warren (February 5, 2005). (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on February 17, 2015. It is true that the approach suggested in this paper would limit police power. Constitutional protection of individual rights exists for that very purpose. We face coercive government action, carried out in a corrupt and racist manner, with military and paramilitary assaults on our homes, leading to mass incarceration and innocent deaths. We can never forget the tyranny of a government unrestrained by an independent judiciary. Our courts must end the War on Drugs.
228. Is the Constitution in Harm's Way? Substantive Due Process and Criminal Law 2011-07-03 at the Wayback Machine Eric Tennen
229. Anon. "The universally unconstitutional war on drugs (3rd Ed.)". Archived from the original on July 7, 2012. Retrieved July 31, 2011.
230. , Drug Policy Education Group, Vol. 2 No.1, Spring/Summer 2001, p. 5
231. Manski, Charles F.; Pepper, John V.; Petrie, Carol V., eds. (2001). Informing America's Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don't Know Keeps Hurting Us. doi:10.17226/10021. ISBN 978-0-309-07273-1. Retrieved February 3, 2024. {{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
232. "The President Interviews the Creator of "The Wire" About the War on Drugs". whitehouse.gov. March 26, 2015. from the original on January 30, 2017. Retrieved March 28, 2015 – via National Archives.
233. Peter H. Reuter, Sealing the borders: the effects of increased military participation in drug interdiction (RAND 1988); Robert E. Kessler, "Study: Military Can't Curb Drugs", Newsday, May 23, 1988 at 23; "Military support would have little effect on drug smuggling, study says", United Press International, March 4, 1988.
234. C. Peter Rydell, Controlling Cocaine: Supply Versus Demand Programs (Rand Drug Policy Research Center 1994).
235. Dobkin, Carlos; Nicosia, Nancy (February 2009). "The War on Drugs: Methamphetamine, Public Health, and Crime". American Economic Review. 99 (1): 324–349. doi:10.1257/aer.99.1.324. PMC 2883188. PMID 20543969.
236. . Cato.org. July 17, 1991. Archived from the original on December 29, 2013. Retrieved March 27, 2011.
237. . Office of National Drug Control Policy. April 14, 2006. Archived from the original on September 27, 2007. Retrieved October 4, 2007.
238. Juan Forero, "Colombia's Coca Survives U.S. plan to uproot it", The New York Times, August 19, 2006
239. Davenport-Hines, Richard Peter Treadwell (2002). The Pursuit of Oblivion: A Global History of Narcotics. New York: W. W. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-05189-6. OCLC 301684673.
240. Don Podesta and Douglas Farah, "Drug Policy in Andes Called Failure", The Washington Post, March 27, 1993
241. . Prohibition Costs. Archived from the original on October 17, 2007. Retrieved February 20, 2008.
242. Drug Overdose Death Rates By National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).
243. Declaration of World Forum Against Drugs, Stockholm 2008. An international conference against drug abuse with participants from 82 nations July 23, 2016, at the Wayback Machine. Wfad.se.
244. Miron, Jeffrey A. (September 17, 2007). . Marijuana Policy Project. Archived from the original on December 4, 2007. Retrieved December 27, 2007.
245. Johnston, L. D.; O'Malley, P. M.; Bachman, J. G.; Schulenberg, J. E. (November 30, 2005). "Table 13: Trends in Availability of Drugs as Perceived by Twelfth Graders" (PDF). Teen drug use down but progress halts among youngest teens. Monitoring the Future. (PDF) from the original on July 24, 2011. Retrieved August 23, 2007.
246. . Archived from the original on July 10, 2010.
247. "truth: the Anti-drugwar NSDUH Trends in Past Month Substance Use (1979–2008) by Percentage of Population 1 of 2". from the original on July 8, 2011. Retrieved February 3, 2011.
248. White House Drug Policy Director Kerlikowske Meets with Swedish Counterdrug Officials, ONDCP, March 21, 2011 December 27, 2022, at the Wayback Machine. Whitehousedrugpolicy.gov.
249. Elsevier December 27, 2022, at the Wayback Machine. Jaacap.com.
250. Werb, D.; Kerr, T.; Nosyk, B.; Strathdee, S.; Montaner, J.; Wood, E. (September 30, 2013). "The temporal relationship between drug supply indicators: an audit of international government surveillance systems". BMJ Open. 3 (9): e003077. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003077. PMC 3787412. PMID 24080093.
251. "National Drug and Control Budget" (PDF). Office of National Drug Control Policy. March 2014. (PDF) from the original on June 6, 2017 – via National Archives.
252. "BOP Statistics: Inmate Race". www.bop.gov. from the original on July 30, 2019. Retrieved August 15, 2019.
253. "Crime & Justice Electronic Data Abstracts, Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS)". www.bjs.gov. from the original on August 15, 2019. Retrieved August 15, 2019.
254. "End the Drug War". Foreign Policy. from the original on September 13, 2017. Retrieved July 12, 2017.
255. Friesendorf, Cornelius (2007). US Foreign Policy and the War on Drugs: Displacing the Cocaine and Heroin Industry. Routledge. ISBN 9781134123940. Retrieved July 12, 2017.
256. Peter, Andreas (June 22, 2003). "A Tale of Two Borders: The U.S.-Mexico and U.S.-Canada Lines After 9/11". Center for Comparative Immigration Studies. from the original on August 27, 2018. Retrieved July 12, 2017.
257. Westhoff, Lotte Berendje Rozemarijn (2013). Ronald Reagan's War on Drugs: A Policy Failure But A Political Success (MA). Leiden University. hdl:1887/21802. Retrieved November 29, 2021.
258. Bagley, Bruce Michael (1988). "US Foreign Policy and the War on Drugs: Analysis of a Policy Failure". Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs. 30 (2/3): 189–212. doi:10.2307/165986. JSTOR 165986.
259. Mitchell, Ojmarrh (January 1, 2009). "Ineffectiveness, Financial Waste, and Unfairness: The Legacy of the War on Drugs". Journal of Crime and Justice. 32 (2): 1–19. doi:10.1080/0735648X.2009.9721268. ISSN 0735-648X. S2CID 144508042.
260. "A Record Number of Drug-Related Deaths Shows the Drug War Is Remarkably Effective at Killing People". Reason.com. May 13, 2022.
261. "A Record Number of Drug-Related Deaths Illustrates the Lethal Consequences of Prohibition". Reason.com. July 15, 2021.
262. jstaff (September 20, 2023). "The International Community Must Act on UN Human Rights Chief's Ground-Breaking Call for Systemic Drug Policy Reform". WOLA. Retrieved October 1, 2023.
263. "134 NGOs sign collective statement urging the international community to act on UN human rights chief's ground-breaking call for systemic drug policy reform". IDPC. Retrieved October 1, 2023.
264. "Data Suggests Drug Treatment can Lower U.S. Crime". Reuters. May 17, 2012. from the original on August 17, 2012. Retrieved November 22, 2012.
265. English, Matthew (September 30, 2012). "U.S. Prison System Needs Reform, Does not Meet Intended Goals". Collegiate Times. from the original on November 22, 2012. Retrieved November 23, 2012.
266. Fish, J. M. (Ed.) (1998). How to legalize drugs. Northvale, New Jersey: Jason Aronson.
267. Fish, J. M. (Ed.) (2000). "Is our drug policy effective? Are there alternatives?" New York City, New York: Fordham Urban Law Journal. (Proceedings of the March 17 & 18, 2000 joint conference of the New York Academy of Sciences, New York Academy of Medicine, and Association of the Bar of the City of New York. Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 3–262.)
268. Fish, J. M. (Ed.) (2006). Drugs and society: U. S. public policy. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield.
269. Alter, Jonathan. "The War on Addiction". Newsweek, February 12, 2001, pp. 37–43
270. How Goes the "War on Drugs": An Assessment of U.S. Drug Problems and Policy. RAND Corporation Drug Policy Research Center, 2005
271. The President's National Drug Control Strategy, White House, 2004. February 13, 2009, at the Wayback Machine
272. Huddleston, C. West III, et al. Painting the Current Picture: A National Report Card on Drug Courts and Other Problem Solving Court Programs in the United States, Vol. 1, Num. 1, May 2004
273. Lappin, Harley G. Annual Determination of Average Cost of Incarceration. Department of Justice – Bureau of Prisons. June 6, 2007
274. Porter, Eduardo (July 3, 2012). "Numbers Tell of Failure in Drug War". The New York Times. from the original on January 29, 2017. Retrieved July 4, 2012.

Further reading

• Hari, Johann (2015). Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs. London; New York: Bloomsbury. ISBN 978-1620408902.
• Blanchard, Michael; Chin, Gabriel J. (1998). "Identifying the Enemy in the War on Drugs: A Critique of the Developing Rule Permitting Visual Identification of Indescript White Powders in Narcotics Prosecutions". American University Law Review (47): 557. SSRN 1128945.
• Daniel Burton-Rose, The Celling of America: An Inside Look at the U.S. Prison Industry. Common Courage Press, 1998.
• Stephanie R. Bush-Baskette, "The War on Drugs as a War on Black Women," in Meda Chesney-Lind and Lisa Pasko (eds.), Girls, Women, and Crime: Selected Readings. Sage, 2004.
• Chin, Gabriel (2002). "Race, the War on Drugs and the Collateral Consequences of Criminal Conviction". Gender, Race & Justice (6): 253. SSRN 390109.
• Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs and the Press. New York: Verso, 1998.
• Mitchell Earlywine, Understanding Marijuana: A New Look at the Scientific Evidence. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005.
• Kathleen J. Frydl, The Drug Wars in America, 1940–1973. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
• Nunn, Kenneth B. (2002). "Race, Crime and the Pool of Surplus Criminality: Or Why the War on Drugs Was a War on Blacks". Gender, Race & Justice. 6 (6): 381.
• Tony Payan, "A War that Can't Be Won." Tucson: The University of Arizona Press, 2013.
• Preston Peet, Under the Influence: The Disinformation Guide to Drugs. The Disinformation Company, 2004.
• Thomas C. Rowe, Federal Narcotics Laws and the War on Drugs: Money Down a Rat Hole. Binghamton, NY: Haworn Press, 2006.
• Eric Schneider, "The Drug War Revisited," Berfrois, November 2, 2011.
• Peter Dale Scott and Jonathan Marshall, Cocaine Politics: Drugs, Armies, and the CIA in Central America. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1911.
• Dominic Streatfeild, Cocaine: An Unauthorized Biography. Macmillan, 2003.
• Douglas Valentine, The Strength of the Wolf: The Secret History of America's War on Drugs. New York: Verso, 2004.

Government and NGO reports

• National Drug Threat Assessment 2009 from the United States Department of Justice
• War On Drugs: Legislation in the 108th Congress and Related Developments, a 2003 report from the Congressional Research Service via the State Department website
• The Report of the Canadian Government Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs – 1972
• Drug Enforcement Administration (2017), (PDF) (2017 ed.), Washington, D.C.: Author, archived from the original (PDF) on December 3, 2016, retrieved January 23, 2018
• Revealing the missing link to Climate Justice: Drug Policy, a 2023 report from the International Coalition on Drug Policy Reform and Environmental Justice

External links

 

Wikimedia Commons has media related to War on Drugs.

• Narco News – news site focusing on drug war in Latin America
• Drug Policy Facts
• Major Studies of Drugs and Drug Policy Full text of major government commission reports on the drug laws from around the world over the last 100 years
• Historical Research on the Drug War Full text of numerous full histories of the drug war and thousands of original historical documents