Why specify PoC? I have several non-PoC friends busted for minor possession (weed) while in grad school and found themselves unhireable upon graduation with masters of engineering degrees.
The drug laws have race at their roots. If you don’t have time to look up the history I’ll give you an example: during the “crack cocaine epidemic” in the 80s and 90s the focus was on a version of cocaine mostly used by the poor and not on the use of the powdered stuff by the middle and upper classes — in fact that usage was celebrated.
Oh but wait: I didn’t use the word “race” in that example. Just look at the wealth and access to the middle classes for Black people in the US and decide.
Note: I haven’t looked at this for meth and fentanyl. Pot and cocaine in the beginning of the 20th century (the origin of the US recreational drug laws) were chosen because they were common the Black community at the time. I don’t doubt your experience (that of your friends I mean) but the burden is not spread uniformly.
I won't deny that there are racist reasons for that, but another part of the explanation might be that the poor classes commit more violent crimes, and thus focusing on crack cocaine helps fight violent crime more. Which then would invite the subject "Is focusing on violent crime (vs "white collar crime") better for society or another form of racism?". I don't have an answer to that one.
Your statements come across as suggesting that the non-PoC experience doesn't matter, since a random PoC has it worse. I hope that it wasn't intentional.