The draconian disparities in the sentencing of defendants convicted of crack cocaine offenses compared with those convicted of powder cocaine offenses is an oft-decried area of criminal sentencing. Since the 1980s, the United States Sentencing Commission’s Sentencing Guidelines used a "100-to-1" ratio, meaning that a criminal defendant who was convicted or pled guilty to an offense involving a quantity of crack cocaine–"or cocaine base"–was sentenced as harshly as a defendant possessing a quantity of powder cocaine, or cocaine hydrochloride, 100 times greater. These results were particularly harsh considering that exponentially smaller amounts of crack cocaine were necessary to trigger the 5 and 10 year mandatory-minimum sentences than other drugs.
On August 3, 2010, the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 went into effect. The Act reduces the powder/crack ratio to 1:18. It eliminated the 5 year mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession of crack cocaine and raised it to 28 grams, and raised the quantity needed to trigger the 10 year mandatory minimum to 280 grams.
At least one federal case, U.S. v. Douglas (D. ME), has applied the changes retroactively to a pending case.
In the wake of the FSA, the Sentencing Commission has amended Section 2D1.1, revising the crack cocaine Guidelines downward by two offense levels, and also providing for capping the offense level of defendants with a minor role in the offense at 32.