The Constitutional Legal Case for Due Process and Equal Protection of the Laws

An undeniable clear legal argument supported by painfully true evidence. By: Tristan Matthew Chen, CEO Chairman, United States Anti-Slavery Organization.

LEGAL ARGUMENT

I. The Continued Incarceration of Individuals Convicted Under Discriminatory Drug Policies Violates the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments’ Due Process Guarantees

A. Due Process Requires That Criminal Convictions Be Constitutionally Valid, Non-Discriminatory, and Rationally Related to a Legitimate State Interest

Under the 5th Amendment (applicable to the federal government) and the 14th Amendment (applicable to the states), no person may be deprived of liberty without due process of law. Due Process demands that real and true criminal convictions arise from laws and procedures that are:

1. Facially constitutional

2. Free from discriminatory purpose

3. Grounded in legitimate governmental objectives, not racial animus or political oppression.

   
   

The historical record surrounding marijuana prohibition and the broader War on Drugs reveals that these policies were conceived and enforced with explicit racial motives. Statements from federal architects of drug prohibition—including admissions by Nixon administration officials that drug criminalization was intentionally used to target Black communities and anti-war advocates—demonstrate that the statutes underpinning millions of these marijuana convictions were tainted at their inception:

“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.”

-John Ehrlichman, Nixon White House Counsel and Domestic Policy Chief

The Supreme Court has long held that laws enacted with discriminatory purpose violate the Equal Protection Clause and cannot form a lawful basis for criminal punishment.

A conviction arising from an unconstitutional statute is void and cannot justify deprivation of liberty. Yet here we are 50 years later, and this blatantly oppressive, corrupt marijuana prohibition continues to violate civil rights and incarcerates millions of mostly Black and Brown people every single decade. Having a criminal record creates hurdles in housing, employment, education, voting rights, professional licensing, public benefits, financial barriers, so many collateral consequences, civil penalties that continue long after someone finishes their sentence. Nearly 80 million American citizens, having criminal records today.

At what point does the United States Supreme Court and the American Congress decide to take action against obvious unconstitutional crimes against humanity and decide to uphold due process and equal protection of the laws and ultimately serve justice and freedom for every citizen who currently remains wrongfully incarcerated in prisons?

When will the American citizens and leaders be able to unite in the pursuit for peace and liberation? It is clear and irrefutable that the corrupt marijuana prohibition "War On Drugs" violates the 14th Amendment because the evidence shows that marijuana has been used precisely as a tool of racial oppression, and this violates the part that says: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States."

B. Modern Legislative Repeal of Marijuana Prohibitions Confirms That These Policies Lack Rational Basis Today

Due process also includes the requirement that a criminal statute be rationally related to a legitimate state interest. The nationwide repeal, decriminalization, and legalization of marijuana—by so many states, the federal rescheduling process, and overwhelming bipartisan public consensus—demonstrates that these statutes no longer serve any constitutional or rational governmental purpose, and actually never did in the first place.

A conviction cannot remain constitutionally enforceable where its underlying statutory foundation has been repudiated by the vast majority of jurisdictions, deemed unjust by society, and recognized as a product of obviously racialized oppressive policymaking. Continued incarceration under these circumstances is arbitrary, irrational, and violative of substantive due process.

Healthier than alcohol and tobacco, marijuana has medical benefits and therefore by default does not even meet the criteria to be listed as a deadly Schedule 1 Drug, such as fentanyl, heroin, meth etc. Since the corrupt marijuana statute obviously lacks a rational basis, and was implemented strictly to oppress Black and minority groups in America, due process continues to be violated.

II. Mandatory Minimum Sentences Violate Substantive Due Process and the Eighth Amendment’s "Evolving Standards of Decency"

Evolving standards of decency is a constitutional doctrine the U.S. Supreme Court uses to decide whether a punishment violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishments. Mandatory minimum sentencing schemes—central to the War on Drugs— and the driving factor today of unjust incarceration and modern Slavery— strip judges of their constitutional role, mandate disproportionate punishments, and coerce guilty pleas under threat of extreme sentences. These features violate both:

• Substantive Due Process (as they are arbitrary and shock the conscience)

• The Eighth Amendment (as they lead to cruel and excessive punishments absolutely and most obviously inconsistent with modern standards of decency and human rights).

  
  

  • life in prison for 1 gram of marijuana

  • life in prison for a few grams of marijuana

  • life in prison for 30 grams of marijuana

  • life in prison for a veteran growing medical marijuana

  • life in prison for stealing a slice of pizza

  • life in prison for stealing a bicycle

How can people continue to be sentenced to life in prison for marijuana, when these exact same actions are literally legal in Washington DC today (you are allowed to grow, possess, buy marijuana) and when at the same time the legal marijuana industry is worth billions and there are people who are making so much money off it, while others will die in prison. It is time to stop the racial oppression of the corrupt fraudulent marijuana prohibition. Due Process and Equal Protection of the Laws must be upheld by Congress.

What is the point of having all these Amendments that are supposed to protect us, if citizens do not in good faith act to uphold them, and if the truth is clear that constitutional and human rights have been and continue to be systematically violated on a daily basis by the US Federal Government and American States.

Courts have repeatedly held that a punishment so extreme and disconnected from individualized culpability may violate due process. Mandatory minimums—especially for nonviolent drug offenses—are quintessentially excessive and cruel: they impose multi-decade and even life sentences without regard to mitigating factors, rehabilitative potential, or proportionality, and they obviously violate both human and constitutional rights.

Widespread bipartisan legislative reforms dismantling mandatory minimums further confirm their constitutional infirmity. So why do they still exist and what will be done to remedy the situation for an unprecedented thousands of American citizens who remain unjustly incarcerated in prisons?

The continued imprisonment of individuals under a regime deemed unjust, inhumane, and irrational violates the most basic constitutional protections. Therefore, it is of the greatest importance that Due Process and Equal Protection of the Laws be upheld for all citizens who remain unjustly incarcerated because of Mandatory Minimums and the War on Drugs.

III. The Equal Protection Clause Forbids Racially Discriminatory Drug Enforcement, Prosecution, and Sentencing

A. Drug Enforcement and Sentencing Under the War on Drugs Produced Documented, Extreme Racial Disparities

The Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause prohibits the government from enforcing laws in a racially discriminatory manner. The War on Drugs—by every empirical measure—has produced:

• Gross racial disparities in arrests,

• Disproportionate charging by prosecutors,

• Harsher plea offers for Black defendants,

• Higher likelihood of mandatory minimum exposure, and

• Longer sentences for identical conduct compared to white defendants.

These disparities are not accidental. They reflect decades of discriminatory enforcement priorities, resource allocations, prosecutorial discretion patterns, and statutory design explicitly intended to criminalize Black communities.

B. Laws Passed With Discriminatory Intent Cannot Be Constitutionally Enforced

The Supreme Court has held that state action motivated by racial discrimination is unconstitutional, even if the statute is facially neutral. Because key drug policies—including the corrupt marijuana prohibition—were enacted with documented discriminatory intent, therefore every conviction arising from such statutes is constitutionally suspect.

Where the origin of a law is poisoned by racial animus, the resulting incarceration cannot be considered constitutional. The state cannot continue to enforce convictions built atop racially discriminatory legal frameworks without violating equal protection.

Then again, Slavery is still literally legal in America today in 2025.

IV. The Thirteenth Amendment Bars Slavery and Involuntary Servitude Unless Conviction Was Lawfully Obtained — These Convictions Were Not

The Thirteenth Amendment prohibits Slavery and involuntary servitude “except as punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.” The exception clause is conditional. It applies only when a conviction is lawful and constitutionally valid.

Convictions arising from:

• Racially discriminatory laws,

• Discriminatory enforcement,

• Coercive mandatory minimum plea pressures, or

• Statutes lacking legitimate governmental purpose

  
  

are not constitutionally “duly” obtained.

Therefore, the forced labor and involuntary servitude imposed on individuals incarcerated under these unconstitutional drug policies constitute unlawful Slavery under the Thirteenth Amendment. The state cannot hide behind the punishment clause to justify Enslavement resulting from invalid convictions.

There are over 4000 corporations that profit from unjust incarceration. Every single corporation that has knowingly and willfully exploited and made money from this catastrophic humanitarian and Slavery crisis, is complicit and should without a doubt join the calling for Freedom and Justice. Especially every single corporation that directly profited from the Transatlantic Slave Trade.

V. The Constitution Requires Judicial Review, Redress, and Release for Those Unlawfully Deprived of Liberty

When a conviction is tainted by constitutional violations, and blatant human rights violations, courts have recognized that the appropriate remedy is vacatur, resentencing, or release. Continued incarceration under unconstitutional laws:

• Violates due process,

• Denies equal protection,

• Inflicts cruel and unusual punishment, and

• Constitutes unlawful involuntary servitude.

Under established constitutional doctrine, the state has an affirmative duty to correct, remedy, and end ongoing violations.

Individuals imprisoned under the War on Drugs, discriminatory marijuana statutes, and mandatory minimum regimes are entitled to full constitutional protection and judicial relief, freedom and equal justice under law.

To maintain their incarceration is to participate in ongoing racial subjugation and unconstitutional Enslavement. The Constitution cannot tolerate such inhumane and cruel violations, and neither can any citizen.

The Exploitation of Slavery through the 13th Amendment loophole since 1865 must finally end. The United States Congress must act now immediately to address all of these problems and uphold Due Process as well as equal protection of the laws.

The words inscribed on the outside of the US Supreme Court "Equal Justice Under Law" deserve to finally become a reality for all, especially every single American citizen who has been truly and undeniably wrongfully incarcerated and Enslaved because of the corrupt War On Drugs and Mandatory Minimums.