If rehabilitation is the point of our justice system, government agencies shouldn’t punish people who’ve paid their debt, and who are trying to do the right thing.

Altimont owns Carmen’s Corner Store in Hagerstown, Maryland, a community where around 20 percent of people rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to buy their groceries. But a federal agency decided that Altimont can never accept SNAP as a form of payment at Carmen’s.

That decision isn’t because Altimont has done anything wrong as a business owner, but rather because of unrelated crimes from 2004, for which he’s already served his time.

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) permanently bans anyone with drug, alcohol, tobacco, or firearms convictions from participating in the SNAP program—a harsher punishment than the agency dishes out to those who have actually defrauded the program. That’s not just irrational, it’s also unconstitutional, which is why Altimont teamed up with our organization, the Institute for Justice (IJ), to file a federal lawsuit against the agency on Tuesday.

  • NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
    12·
    1 year ago

    People just think punishing crime more reduces crime more and it’s not (necessarily) correct. And in a democratic system we reward what people think is true over what is true.

    This is one of those rare instances that (to them) punishment is openly the point. It doesn’t matter that there are ways to save money and increase everyone’s quality of life in the process. And it doesn’t hurt that an entire industry has grown to steal money from the state to punish these people and a small portion is put back into advertising/lobbying to make sure the cycle continues.