Punitive vs. Rehabilitative Drug Policies: A Comparative Analysis Across U.S. States

• In Event: Global Perspectives on Law, Inequality, and Punitive Governance

Abstract

This study critically examines the implications of contradictory state-level drug policies in the United States, namely their impact on sentencing and law enforcement practices. The comparison is drawn from an intensive evaluation of Colorado and Oregon- states that have implemented drug legalization and harm reduction policies-against Mississippi and Florida, which adhere to punitive, prohibitionist policies. Nebraska is also examined as a border enforcement case to identify potential policy spillover effects. This study synthesizes statutory legislation, judicial sentencing data, policy critiques, and available scholarly studies by employing a qualitative comparative policy analysis. The objective is to compare the influence of legal approaches to drug control on criminal justice decisions including rates of incarceration, judicial discretion, and police priorities. The review further reflects on the extent to which policy models reflect principles of punishment. Grounded in Legal Cynicism, Routine Activity, and Broken Windows theories, the study situates these policy differences within the context of broader justice reform and public safety discussions. It also aims to inform sentencing standardization, equitable enforcement, and interstate coordination discussions by offering evidence-based direction to policymakers and criminal justice practitioners to enhance fairness, consistency, and effectiveness in drug policy enforcement.

Author

• Fahad Bin Islam Khan, University of Mississippi