racial inequality in the criminal justice system essay

Report Racial and Ethnic Disparities in the Criminal Justice System

Easily browse the critical components of this report…

Introduction

Throughout the nation, people of color are far more likely to enter the nation’s justice system than the general population. State and federal governments are aware of this disparity, and researchers and policymakers are studying the drivers behind the statistics and what strategies might be employed to address the disparities, ensuring evenhanded processes at all points in the criminal justice system. This primer highlights data, reports, state laws, innovations, commissions, approaches and other resources addressing racial and ethnic disparities within our country’s justice systems, to provide information for the nation’s decision-makers, state legislators.

Examining the Data and Innovative Justice Responses to Address Disparities

For states to have a clear understanding of the extent of racial and ethnic disparities in the states, they need to have data from all stages of the criminal justice system.

1. Law Enforcement

Disparities within traffic stops.

Contact with law enforcement, particularly at traffic stops, is often the most common interaction people have with the criminal legal system.

According to a  large-scale analysis of racial disparities in police stops across the United States , “police stop and search decisions suffer from persistent racial bias.” The study, the largest to date, analyzed data on approximately 95 million stops from 21 state patrol agencies and 35 municipal police departments across the country. The authors found Black drivers were less likely to be stopped after sunset, when it is more difficult to determine a driver’s race, suggesting bias in stop decisions. Furthermore, by examining the rate at which stopped drivers were searched and turned up contraband, the study found that the bar for searching Black and Hispanic drivers was lower than that for searching white drivers.

The study also investigated the effects of legalization of recreational cannabis on racial disparities in stop outcomes—specifically examining Colorado and Washington, two of the first states to legalize the substance. It found that following the legalization of cannabis, the number of total searches fell substantially. The authors theorized this may have been due to legalization removing a common reason officers cite for conducting searches. Nevertheless, Black and Hispanic drivers were still more likely to be searched than white drivers were post-legalization.

Data Collection Requirements in Statute

At least 23 states and the District of Columbia have laws related to or requiring collection of data when an individual is stopped by law enforcement. Some of these laws specifically prohibit racial profiling or require departments to adopt a policy to the same effect. Collection of demographic data can serve as a means of ensuring compliance with those provisions or informing officials on current practices so they can respond accordingly.

States have employed many reporting or other requirements for evaluation of the data collected under these laws. For example, Montana requires agencies to adopt a policy that provides for periodic reviews to “determine whether any peace officers of the law enforcement agency have a pattern of stopping members of minority groups for violations of vehicle laws in a number disproportionate to the population of minority groups residing or traveling within the jurisdiction…”

Maryland’s law requires local agencies to report their data to the Maryland Statistical Analysis Center. The center is then tasked with analyzing the annual reports from local agencies and posting the data in an online display that is filtered by jurisdiction and by each data point collected by officers.

The amount and kind of data collected also varies state by state. Some states leave the specifics to local jurisdictions or require the creation of a form based on statutory guidance, but most require the collection of demographic data including race, ethnicity, color, age, gender, minority group or state of residence. Notably, Missouri’s law requires collection of the following 10 data points:

• The age, gender and race or minority group of the individual stopped.
• The reasons for the stop.
• Whether a search was conducted because of the stop.
• If a search was conducted, whether the individual consented to the search, the probable cause for the search, whether the person was searched, whether the person’s property was searched, and the duration of the search.
• Whether any contraband was discovered during the search and the type of any contraband discovered.
• Whether any warning or citation was issued because of the stop.
• If a warning or citation was issued, the violation charged or warning provided.
• Whether an arrest was made because of either the stop or the search.
• If an arrest was made, the crime charged.
• The location of the stop.

State laws differ as to what kind of stop triggers a data reporting requirement. For example, Florida’s law applies to stops where citations are issued for violations of the state’s safety belt law. While Virginia’s law is broader, requiring all law enforcement to collect data pertaining to all investigatory motor vehicle stops, all stop-and-frisks of a person and all other investigatory detentions that do not result in arrest or the issuance of a summons.

Cultural Competency and Bias Reduction Training for Law Enforcement

At least 48 states and the District of Columbia have statutory training requirements for law enforcement. These laws require law enforcement personnel statewide to be trained on specific topics during their initial training and/or at recurring intervals, such as in-service training or continuing education.

In most states, the law simply requires training on a subject, leaving the specifics to be determined by state training boards or other local authorities designated by law. However, some states, such as Iowa and West Virginia, have very detailed requirements and even specify how many hours are required, the subject of the training, required content, whether the training must be received in person and who is approved to provide the training.

Overall, at least 26 states mandate some form of bias reduction training. Find out more about these laws on NCSL’s Law Enforcement Training webpage.

Law Enforcement Employment and Labor Policies

States have also addressed equity and accountability in policing through certification and accountability measures and hiring practices.

For example, a 2020 California law ( AB 846 ) changed state certification requirements by expanding current officer evaluations to screen for various kinds of bias in addition to physical, emotional or mental conditions that might adversely affect an officer’s exercise of peace officer powers. The law also requires the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to study, review and update regulations and screening materials to identify explicit and implicit bias against race or ethnicity, gender, nationality, religion, disability or sexual orientation related to emotional and mental condition evaluations.

In addition to screening, the California law requires every department or agency that employs peace officers to review the job descriptions used in recruitment and hiring and to make changes that deemphasize the paramilitary aspects of the job. The intent is to place more emphasis on community interaction and collaborative problem-solving.

Nevada ( AB 409 ), in 2021, added to statutory certification requirements mandating evaluation of officer recruits to identify implicit bias on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, physical or mental disability, sexual orientation or gender identity expression. That same year, Nevada also enacted legislation ( SB 236 ) that requires law enforcement agencies to establish early warning systems to identify officers who display bias indicators or demonstrate other problematic behavior. It also requires increased supervision, training and, if appropriate, counseling to officers identified by the system. If an officer is repeatedly identified by the early warning system, the law requires the employing agency to consider consequences, including transfer from high-profile assignments or other means of discipline.

Another area of interest for states has been hiring a more diverse workforce in law enforcement and support agencies. For example, New Jersey SB 2767  (2020) required the state Civil Service Commission to conduct a statewide diversity analysis of the ethnic and racial makeup of all law enforcement agencies in the state.

Finally, at least one state addressed bias in policing through a state civil rights act. Massachusetts ( SB 2963 ) established a state right to bias-free professional policing. Conduct against an aggrieved person resulting in decertification by the Police Office Standards and Training Commission constitute a prima-facie violation of the right to bias-free professional policing. The law also specifies that no officer is immune from civil liability for violating a person’s right to bias-free professional policing if the conduct results in officer decertification.

Disproportionality of Native Americans in the Justice System According to the U.S. Department of Justice, from 2015 to 2019, the number of American Indian or Alaska Native justice-involved individuals housed in local jails for federal correctional authorities, state prison authorities or tribal governments increased by  3.6% . Though American Indian and Alaska Natives make up a small proportion of the national incarcerated population relative to other ethnicities, some jurisdictions are finding they are disproportionately represented in the justice system. For example, in  Pennington County , S.D., it is estimated that 10% to 25% of the county’s residents are Native American, but they account for 55% of the county’s jail population. Similarly, Montana’s Commission on Sentencing  found  that while Native Americans represent 7% of the state’s general population, they comprised 17% of those incarcerated in correctional facilities in 2014 and 19% of the state’s total arrests in 2015.

Modal title

2. pretrial release and prosecution, risk assessments.

Recently, state laws have authorized or required courts to use pretrial risk assessment tools. There are about  two dozen pretrial risk assessment tools in use  across the states. 

Laws in Alaska, Delaware, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, New Jersey and Vermont require courts to adopt or consider risk assessments in at least some, if not all, cases on a statewide basis. While laws in Colorado, Illinois, Montana, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia and West Virginia authorize or encourage, but do not require, adopting a risk assessment tool on a statewide basis.

This broad state adoption of risk assessment tools raises concern that systemic bias may impact their use. In 2014, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder  said  pretrial risk assessment tools “may exacerbate unwarranted and unjust disparities that are already far too common in our criminal justice system and our society.”

More than 100 civil rights organizations expressed similar concerns in  a statement  following a 2017 convening. The dependance of pretrial risk assessment tools on data that reflect systemic bias is the crux of the issue. The statement highlights that police officers disproportionately arrest people of color, which impacts risk assessment tools that rely on arrest data. The statement then set out key principles mitigating harm that may be caused by risk assessments, recognizing their broad use across the country.

The conversation about bias in pretrial risk assessments is ongoing. In 2021, the Urban Institute published the report “ Racial Equity and Criminal Justice Risk Assessment .” In the report, the authors discuss and make recommendations for policymakers to balance the use of risk assessment as a component of evidence-based practice with pursuing goals of reducing racial and ethnic disparities. The authors state that “carefully constructed and properly used risk assessment instruments that account for fairness can help limit racial bias in criminal justice decision-making.”

Academic studies show varied results related to the use of risk assessments and their effect on racial and ethnic disparities in the justice system. One study, “ Racist Algorithms or Systemic Problems ,” concludes “there is currently no valid evidence that instruments in general are biased against individuals of color,” and, “Where bias has been found, it appears to have more to do with the specific risk instrument.” In another study, “ Employing Standardized Risk Assessment in Pretrial Release Decisions ,” the authors, without making causal conclusions, find that “despite comparable risk scores, African American participants were detained significantly longer than Caucasian participants … and were less likely to receive diversion opportunity.”

In a recent report titled “ Civil Rights and Pretrial Risk Assessment Instruments ,” the authors recommend steps to protect civil rights when risk assessment tools are used. The report underscores the importance of expansive transparency throughout design and implementation of these tools. It also suggests more community oversight and governance that promotes reduced incarceration and racially equitable outcomes. Finally, the report suggests decisions made by judges to detain should be rare, deliberate and not dependent solely on pretrial risk assessment instruments.

States are starting to regulate the use of risk assessments and promote best practices by requiring the tool to be validated on a regular basis, be free from racial or gender bias and that documents, data and records related to the tool be publicly available.

For example, California (2019  SB 36 ) requires a pretrial services agency validate pretrial risk assessment tools on a regular basis and to make specified information regarding the tool, including validation studies, publicly available. The law also requires the judicial council to maintain a list of pretrial services agencies that have satisfied the validation requirements and complied with the transparency requirements. California published its most recent validation  report  in June 2021.

Similarly, Idaho (2019  HB 118 ) now requires all documents, data, records and information used to build and validate a risk assessment tool to be publicly available for inspection, auditing and testing. The law requires public availability of ongoing documents, data, records and written policies on usage and validation of a tool. It also authorizes defendants to have access to calculations and data related to their own risk score and prohibits the use of proprietary tools.

Pretrial Release

A  recent report from the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights  evaluates the civil rights implications of pretrial release systems across the country.

Notable findings from the report include stark racial and gender disparities in pretrial populations with higher detention rates and financial conditions of release imposed on minority populations. The report also finds that more than 60% of defendants are detained pretrial because of an inability to pay financial conditions of release. 

States have recently enacted legislation to address defendants’ ability to pay financial conditions of release, with at least 11 states requiring courts to conduct ability-to-pay considerations when setting release conditions.  NCSL’s Statutory Framework of Pretrial Release report  has additional information about state approaches to pretrial release.

Prosecutorial Discretion

Prosecutorial discretion is a term used to describe the power of prosecutors to decide whether to charge a person for a crime, which criminal charges to file and whether to enter into a plea agreement. Some argue this discretion can be a source of disparities within the criminal justice system.

The  Prosecutorial Performance Indicators  (PPI), developed by Florida International University and Loyola University Chicago, is an example of an effort to address this. PPI provides prosecutors’ offices with a method to measure their performance through several indicators, including racial and ethnic disparities. As part of their work to bring accountability and oversight to prosecutorial discretion, PPI has created six measures specifically related to racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system. The PPI measures include the following:

• Victimization of Racial/Ethnic Minorities.
• Case Dismissal Differences by Victim Race/Ethnicity.
• Case Filing Differences by Defendant Race/Ethnicity.
• Pretrial Detention Differences by Defendant Race/Ethnicity.
• Diversion Differences by Defendant Race/Ethnicity.
• Charging and Plea Offer Differences by Defendant Race/Ethnicity.

Below is a table highlighting disparity  data discovered through the use of PPI measures , gathered from specific jurisdictions.

Young People in the Justice System

As is the case in the adult system, compared to young white people, youth of color are disproportionately represented at every stage in the nation’s juvenile justice system. Overall juvenile placements  fell by 54%  between 2001 and 2015, but the placement rate for Black youth was 433 per 100,000, compared to a white youth placement rate of 86 per 100,000. According to a report from the Prison Policy Initiative, an advocacy organization, titled “ Youth Confinement: The Whole Pie 2019 ,” 14% of all those younger than 18 in the U.S. are Black, but they make up 42% of the boys and 35% of the girls in juvenile facilities. Additionally, Native American and Hispanic girls and boys are also overrepresented in the juvenile justice system relative to their share of the total youth population.  Information  from California reveals that prosecutors send Hispanic youth to adult court via “direct file” at over three times the rate of white youth.

At the federal level, the 2018 reauthorized  Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act  requires states to identify and analyze data on race and ethnicity in state, local and tribal juvenile justice systems. States must identify disparities and develop and implement work plans to address them. States are required to document how they are addressing racial and ethnic disparities and establish a coordinating body composed of juvenile justice stakeholders to advise states, units of local government and Native American tribes. If a state fails to meet the act’s requirements, it will result in a 20% reduction of formula grant funding.

An example of a coordinating council that has examined extensive data is the Equity and Justice for All Youth Subcommittee of the  Georgia Juvenile Justice State Advisory Group . The group conducted a county-by-county assessment and analysis of disproportionality in Georgia and found one of the most effective ways to reduce disproportionate treatment of youth is to reduce harsh disciplinary measures in schools. This in turn helps reduce disproportionate referrals to the system.

3. Incarceration

Incarceration statistics help paint a picture of the disparities in the criminal justice system. Significant racial and ethnic disparities can be seen in both jails and prisons. According to the MacArthur Foundation’s  Safety and Justice Challenge website , “While Black and Latinx people make up 30% of the U.S. population, they account for 51% of the jail population.”

An  October 2021 report  from The Sentencing Project, an organization advocating for criminal justice reform, found that “Black Americans are incarcerated in state prisons across the country at nearly five times the rate of whites, and Latinx people are 1.3 times as likely to be incarcerated than non-Latinx whites.” At the time of the report, there were 12 states where more than half of the prison population is Black and seven states with a disparity between the Black and white imprisonment rate of more than 9 to 1.

To have a clearer sense of the racial makeup of who is incarcerated at any given time, some systems developed data dashboards to provide information on their jail populations. In Allegheny County, Pa., for instance, the  jail data dashboard  is publicly available and provides a range of information on who is incarcerated in the jail. The dashboard provides an up-to-the-day look at the race, gender and age of the jail population. According to the dashboard, on average from Jan. 1, 2019, to mid-November 2021, 65% of individuals in the jail were Black.

Dashboards may also be established by the individual state, though these generally look back over a specified time, rather than providing a close-to-live look at the jail population. Colorado passed a law in 2019 ( HB 1297 ) requiring county jails to collect certain data and report it to the state Division of Criminal Justice on a quarterly basis. That data is compiled in a publicly available  Jail Data Dashboard . The dashboard includes information on the racial and ethnic makeup of jail populations in the state. In the second quarter of 2021, 88% of people incarcerated in jails in the state were white, 16% were Black, 2% were Native American and 1% were classified as “other race.” In the same quarter, ethnicity data for incarcerated people showed 67% were non-Hispanic, 33% were Hispanic and 9% were classified with “unknown ethnicity.”

Pennsylvania’s Department of Corrections has an online  dashboard  providing similar information for the state prison population. The dashboard shows Black people make up 12% of the state’s overall population but 44% of the population in state correctional institutions, while white people make up 74% of the state population and 45% of the state prison population. While dashboards themselves don’t reduce disparities, they help create a clearer understanding of them.

4. Sentencing

Racial and ethnic disparities can also be seen in the sentencing of individuals following a criminal conviction. The use of sentencing enhancements and federal drug sentencing both provide examples of the disparities in sentencing.

Sentencing enhancements in California  have been found  to be applied disproportionately to people of color and individuals with mental illness according to the state’s  Committee on Revision of the Penal Code . More than 92% of the people sentenced for a gang enhancement in the state, for instance, are Black or Hispanic. The state has more than 150 different sentence enhancements and more than 80% of people incarcerated in the state are subject to a sentence enhancement.

In response to recommendations from the committee,  AB 333  was enacted in 2021 to modify the state’s gang enhancement statutes by reducing the list of crimes under which use of the current charge alone creates proof of a “pattern” of criminal gang activity and separates gang allegations from underlying charges at trial.

Impact Statements and Legislative Task Forces

Racial impact statements and data.

Legislatures are currently taking many steps to increase their understanding of racial and ethnic disparities in the justice system. In some states, this has taken the form of racial and ethnic impact statements or corrections impact statements.

At least 18 states require  corrections impact statements  for legislation that would make changes to criminal offenses and penalties. These look at the fiscal impact of policy changes on correctional populations and criminal justice resources. A few states have required the inclusion of information on the impacts of policy changes on certain racial and ethnic groups.

Colorado has taken this approach. The state enacted  legislation in 2013  (SB 229) requiring corrections fiscal notes to include information on gender and minority data. In 2019, the state passed  legislation  (HB 1184) requiring the staff of the legislative council to prepare demographic notes for certain bills. These notes use “available data to outline the potential effects of a legislative measure on disparities within the state, including a statement of whether the measure is likely to increase or decrease disparities to the extent the data is available.”

Other states with laws requiring racial and ethnic impact statements include  Connecticut ,  Iowa ,  Maine ,  New Hampshire ,  New Jersey ,  Oregon  and  Virginia . Additionally, Florida  announced  a  partnership  in July 2019 “between the Florida Senate and Florida State University’s College of Criminology & Criminal Justice to analyze racial and ethnic impacts of proposed legislation.”  Minnesota’s Sentencing Commission has compiled racial impact statements for the legislature since 2006, though this is not required in law.

Legislative Studies and Task Forces

States are also taking a closer look at racial disparities within criminal justice systems by creating legislative studies or judicial task forces. These bodies examined disproportionalities in the criminal justice system, investigated possible causes and recommended solutions.

In 2018, Vermont  legislatively established  the state’s  Racial Disparities in the Criminal and Juvenile Justice System Advisory Panel . The panel submitted its  report to the General Assembly  in 2019. Part of the report recommended instituting a public complaint process with the state’s Human Rights Commission to address perceived implicit bias across all state government systems. It also recommended training first responders to identify mental health needs, educating all law enforcement officers on bias and racial disparities and adopting a community policing paradigm. Finally, the panel agreed that increased and improved data collection was important to combat racial and ethnic disparities in the justice system. The panel recommended “developing laws and rules that will require data collection that captures high-impact, high-discretion decision points that occur during the judicial processes.”

State lawmakers are well positioned to make policy changes to address the racial and ethnic disparities that research has shown are present throughout the criminal justice system. As they continue to develop a greater understanding of these disparities, state legislatures have an opportunity to make their systems fairer for all individuals who encounter the justice system, with the goal of  reducing or eliminating racial and ethnic disparities. 

• NCSL on View the PDF Report NCSL

DO NOT DELETE - NCSL Search Page Data

Related resources, juvenile justice legislation database, 2023 policing policy legislation in review.

U.S. states and territories enacted nearly 400 of the more than 2,200 policing policy bills introduced in 2023. This story summarizes laws enacted in three main categories.

First Appearance | April 2024

New NCSL Diversion database plus a round-up of front-end justice policy, research and news.

Contact NCSL

For more information on this topic, use this form to reach NCSL staff.

• What is your role? Legislator Legislative Staff Other
• Is this a press or media inquiry? No Yes
• Admin Email

Black Lives Matter: Eliminating Racial Inequity in the Criminal Justice System

Like an avalanche, racial disparity grows cumulatively as people traverse the criminal justice system. This report identifies four key features of the criminal justice system that produce racially unequal outcomes and showcases initiatives to abate these sources of inequity in adult and juvenile justice systems around the country.

Related to: Racial Justice

• Download PDF

Executive Summary

“Every time you see me, you want to mess with me,” Eric Garner told the group of approaching New York City police officers. As they wrestled him to the ground to arrest him for selling untaxed loose cigarettes, an officer placed Garner in a chokehold and maintained his grip despite Garner’s pleas for air. One hour later, Garner was pronounced dead. The unarmed black man’s death and the white officer’s non-indictment despite videotape evidence have heightened concerns about police practices and accountability. In the wake of the fatal police shooting of unarmed teenager Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and that officer’s non-indictment, a growing number of Americans are outraged and demanding change.

“Black lives matter” has become a rallying cry in light of evidence that the criminal justice system is failing to uphold this basic truth. Official data, although woefully inadequate, 1 show that over half of those killed by police in recent years have been black or Latino. 2 Officers involved in these killings are rarely indicted, much less convicted, for excessive use of force. 3 And official responses to recent protests have spurred further controversy: militarized police forces disrupted public assemblies in Ferguson, 4 and New York City’s police union blamed pro-reform politicians and nonviolent protesters for the killing of two officers by a mentally unstable man. 5

The criminal justice system’s high volume of contact with people of color is a major cause of African Americans’ disproportionate rate of fatal police encounters, as well as of broader perceptions of injustice in many communities. This briefing paper identifies four key features of the justice system that contribute to its disparate racial impact, and presents recent best practices for targeting these inequities drawn from adult and juvenile justice systems around the country. In many cases, these practices have produced demonstrable results.

Policing is by no means the only stage of the justice system that produces racial disparity. Disadvantage accumulating at each step of the process contributes to blacks and Latinos comprising 56% of the incarcerated population, yet only 30% of the U.S. population. 6 The roots of this disparity precede criminal justice contact: conditions of socioeconomic inequality contribute to higher rates of some violent and property crimes among people of color. But four features of the justice system exacerbate this underlying inequality, and jurisdictions around the country have addressed each one through recent reforms.

Many ostensibly race-neutral policies and laws have a disparate racial impact. Police policies such as “broken windows” and stop, question, and frisk have disproportionately impacted young men of color. Prosecutorial policies, such as plea bargain guidelines that disadvantage blacks and Latinos compound these disparities, as do sentencing laws that dictate harsher punishments for crimes for which people of color are disproportionately arrested.

One reform to address this source of disparity in policing is the significant retrenchment of “stop and frisk” in New York City after a court ruled that the policy violated the constitutional rights of blacks and Latinos. Recent legislation reducing the sentencing disparity between the use and distribution of crack versus powder cocaine in California, Missouri, and at the federal level are examples of efforts to tackle sentencing inequalities.

Criminal justice practitioners’ use of discretion is – often unintentionally – influenced by racial bias.

Racial disparities in traffic stops have diminished on a nationwide basis in recent years, but persist in many jurisdictions. Police officers are more likely to stop black and Hispanic drivers for investigative reasons. Once pulled over, people of color are more likely than whites to be searched, and blacks are more likely than whites to be arrested. In jurisdictions like Ferguson, these patterns hold even though police have a higher “contraband hit rate” when searching white versus black drivers. Prosecutors and judges also often treat blacks and Hispanics more harshly in their charging and sentencing decisions.

The Vera Institute of Justice’s work with prosecutors’ offices around the country is one initiative addressing bias in charging decisions by monitoring outcomes and increasing accountability. Similarly, judges in Dorchester, Massachusetts, have worked with police and prosecutors to develop guidelines to reduce racial disparities in charging enhancements for people arrested for drug crimes in a school zone.

Key segments of the criminal justice system are underfunded, putting blacks and Latinos – who are disproportionately low-income – at a disadvantage.

Most states inadequately fund their indigent defense programs. Pretrial release often requires money bond, which can be prohibitive to low-income individuals and increases the pressure on them to accept less favorable plea deals. Many parole and probation systems offer supervision with little support. Public drug treatment programs are also underfunded, thereby limiting treatment and sentencing alternatives for low-income individuals.

New Jersey’s recently overhauled bail laws, which will increase nonmonetary release options, is an effort to create a more even playing field for low-income individuals. In Illinois, the expansion of alternative community programs has helped to nearly halve reliance on secure detention for youth.

Criminal justice policies exacerbate socioeconomic inequalities by imposing collateral consequences on those with criminal records and by diverting public spending.

A criminal conviction creates a barrier to securing steady employment, and those with felony drug convictions are disqualified from public assistance and public housing in many areas. In addition, allocating public resources to punitive programs comes at the expense of investments in crime prevention and drug treatment programs. Because of their higher rates of incarceration and poverty, people of color are disproportionately affected by these policy choices.

A key development in this area is California’s reclassification of a number of low-level offenses from felonies to misdemeanors under Proposition 47 in 2014. This initiative is intended to reduce prison admissions and to spare many low-level offenders the collateral consequences of a felony conviction. The law also redirects a portion of state prison savings – estimated to be $150-$250 million annually – to crime prevention and drug treatment programs.

Click here to download the full report.

Related Resources

California should restore voting rights to over 97,000 citizens.

More than 97,000 California citizens cannot vote while serving a prison term for a felony conviction in any state, federal, or local facility.

By Rachel Jollie and Kristen M. Budd, Ph.D. on April 25, 2024

Nebraska restored voting rights to over 7,000 people with felony convictions.

Legislative Bill 20 allows Nebraskans to register to vote upon completion of their felony prison or probation sentence.

April 19, 2024

Protect and Redirect: America’s Growing Movement to Divert Youth Out of the Justice System

Jurisdictions across the country are advancing reforms to expand and improve diversion, demonstrating diversion’s potential to transform youth justice in ways that protect public safety and enhance youth success.

By Richard Mendel on March 20, 2024

Stay involved & informed

Thanks for subscribing.

By submitting your cell phone number, you are agreeing to receive text messages from The Sentencing Project. Messages may include fundraising. 4 msgs/month. Message and data rates may apply. Text HELP for more information. Text STOP to stop receiving messages. Terms & Conditions . Privacy Policy .

One more thing, !

Please click the link in the email we sent to . Otherwise, we won't be able to contact you.

In the meantime, get social with us! Join our community of over 100,000 followers on Twitter , Facebook , and Instagram .

Search form

• Find Stories
• For Journalists

Stanford scholars examine systemic racism, how to advance racial justice in America

Black History Month is an opportunity to reflect on the Black experience in America and examine continuing systemic racism and discrimination in the U.S. – issues many Stanford scholars are tackling in their research and scholarship.

A pandemic that disproportionately affected communities of color, roadblocks that obstructed efforts to expand the franchise and protect voting discrimination, a growing movement to push anti-racist curricula out of schools – events over the past year have only underscored how prevalent systemic racism and bias is in America today.

What can be done to dismantle centuries of discrimination in the U.S.? How can a more equitable society be achieved? What makes racism such a complicated problem to solve? Black History Month is a time marked for honoring and reflecting on the experience of Black Americans, and it is also an opportunity to reexamine our nation’s deeply embedded racial problems and the possible solutions that could help build a more equitable society.

Stanford scholars are tackling these issues head-on in their research from the perspectives of history, education, law and other disciplines. For example, historian Clayborne Carson is working to preserve and promote the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. and religious studies scholar Lerone A. Martin has joined Stanford to continue expanding access and opportunities to learn from King’s teachings; sociologist Matthew Clair is examining how the criminal justice system can end a vicious cycle involving the disparate treatment of Black men; and education scholar Subini Ancy Annamma is studying ways to make education more equitable for historically marginalized students.

Learn more about these efforts and other projects examining racism and discrimination in areas like health and medicine, technology and the workplace below.

Update: Jan. 27, 2023: This story was originally published on Feb. 16, 2021, and has been updated on a number of occasions to include new content.

Understanding the impact of racism; advancing justice

One of the hardest elements of advancing racial justice is helping everyone understand the ways in which they are involved in a system or structure that perpetuates racism, according to Stanford legal scholar Ralph Richard Banks.

“The starting point for the center is the recognition that racial inequality and division have long been the fault line of American society. Thus, addressing racial inequity is essential to sustaining our nation, and furthering its democratic aspirations,” said Banks , the Jackson Eli Reynolds Professor of Law at Stanford Law School and co-founder of the Stanford Center for Racial Justice .

This sentiment was echoed by Stanford researcher Rebecca Hetey . One of the obstacles in solving inequality is people’s attitudes towards it, Hetey said. “One of the barriers of reducing inequality is how some people justify and rationalize it.”

How people talk about race and stereotypes matters. Here is some of that scholarship.

For Black Americans, COVID-19 is quickly reversing crucial economic gains

Research co-authored by SIEPR’s Peter Klenow and Chad Jones measures the welfare gap between Black and white Americans and provides a way to analyze policies to narrow the divide.

How an ‘impact mindset’ unites activists of different races

A new study finds that people’s involvement with Black Lives Matter stems from an impulse that goes beyond identity.

For democracy to work, racial inequalities must be addressed

The Stanford Center for Racial Justice is taking a hard look at the policies perpetuating systemic racism in America today and asking how we can imagine a more equitable society.

The psychological toll of George Floyd’s murder

As the nation mourned the death of George Floyd, more Black Americans than white Americans felt angry or sad – a finding that reveals the racial disparities of grief.

Seven factors contributing to American racism

Of the seven factors the researchers identified, perhaps the most insidious is passivism or passive racism, which includes an apathy toward systems of racial advantage or denial that those systems even exist.

Scholars reflect on Black history

Humanities and social sciences scholars reflect on “Black history as American history” and its impact on their personal and professional lives.

The history of Black History Month

It's February, so many teachers and schools are taking time to celebrate Black History Month. According to Stanford historian Michael Hines, there are still misunderstandings and misconceptions about the past, present, and future of the celebration.

Numbers about inequality don’t speak for themselves

In a new research paper, Stanford scholars Rebecca Hetey and Jennifer Eberhardt propose new ways to talk about racial disparities that exist across society, from education to health care and criminal justice systems.

Changing how people perceive problems

Drawing on an extensive body of research, Stanford psychologist Gregory Walton lays out a roadmap to positively influence the way people think about themselves and the world around them. These changes could improve society, too.

Welfare opposition linked to threats of racial standing

Research co-authored by sociologist Robb Willer finds that when white Americans perceive threats to their status as the dominant demographic group, their resentment of minorities increases. This resentment leads to opposing welfare programs they believe will mainly benefit minority groups.

Conversations about race between Black and white friends can feel risky, but are valuable

New research about how friends approach talking about their race-related experiences with each other reveals concerns but also the potential that these conversations have to strengthen relationships and further intergroup learning.

Defusing racial bias

Research shows why understanding the source of discrimination matters.

Many white parents aren’t having ‘the talk’ about race with their kids

After George Floyd’s murder, Black parents talked about race and racism with their kids more. White parents did not and were more likely to give their kids colorblind messages.

Stereotyping makes people more likely to act badly

Even slight cues, like reading a negative stereotype about your race or gender, can have an impact.

Why white people downplay their individual racial privileges

Research shows that white Americans, when faced with evidence of racial privilege, deny that they have benefited personally.

Clayborne Carson: Looking back at a legacy

Stanford historian Clayborne Carson reflects on a career dedicated to studying and preserving the legacy of civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.

How race influences, amplifies backlash against outspoken women

When women break gender norms, the most negative reactions may come from people of the same race.

Examining disparities in education

Scholar Subini Ancy Annamma is studying ways to make education more equitable for historically marginalized students. Annamma’s research examines how schools contribute to the criminalization of Black youths by creating a culture of punishment that penalizes Black children more harshly than their white peers for the same behavior. Her work shows that youth of color are more likely to be closely watched, over-represented in special education, and reported to and arrested by police.

“These are all ways in which schools criminalize Black youth,” she said. “Day after day, these things start to sediment.”

That’s why Annamma has identified opportunities for teachers and administrators to intervene in these unfair practices. Below is some of that research, from Annamma and others.

New ‘Segregation Index’ shows American schools remain highly segregated by race, ethnicity, and economic status

Researchers at Stanford and USC developed a new tool to track neighborhood and school segregation in the U.S.

New evidence shows that school poverty shapes racial achievement gaps

Racial segregation leads to growing achievement gaps – but it does so entirely through differences in school poverty, according to new research from education Professor Sean Reardon, who is launching a new tool to help educators, parents and policymakers examine education trends by race and poverty level nationwide.

School closures intensify gentrification in Black neighborhoods nationwide

An analysis of census and school closure data finds that shuttering schools increases gentrification – but only in predominantly Black communities.

Ninth-grade ethnic studies helped students for years, Stanford researchers find

A new study shows that students assigned to an ethnic studies course had longer-term improvements in attendance and graduation rates.

Teaching about racism

Stanford sociologist Matthew Snipp discusses ways to educate students about race and ethnic relations in America.

Stanford scholar uncovers an early activist’s fight to get Black history into schools

In a new book, Assistant Professor Michael Hines chronicles the efforts of a Chicago schoolteacher in the 1930s who wanted to remedy the portrayal of Black history in textbooks of the time.

How disability intersects with race

Professor Alfredo J. Artiles discusses the complexities in creating inclusive policies for students with disabilities.

Access to program for black male students lowered dropout rates

New research led by Stanford education professor Thomas S. Dee provides the first evidence of effectiveness for a district-wide initiative targeted at black male high school students.

How school systems make criminals of Black youth

Stanford education professor Subini Ancy Annamma talks about the role schools play in creating a culture of punishment against Black students.

Reducing racial disparities in school discipline

Stanford psychologists find that brief exercises early in middle school can improve students’ relationships with their teachers, increase their sense of belonging and reduce teachers’ reports of discipline issues among black and Latino boys.

Science lessons through a different lens

In his new book, Science in the City, Stanford education professor Bryan A. Brown helps bridge the gap between students’ culture and the science classroom.

Teachers more likely to label black students as troublemakers, Stanford research shows

Stanford psychologists Jennifer Eberhardt and Jason Okonofua experimentally examined the psychological processes involved when teachers discipline black students more harshly than white students.

Why we need Black teachers

Travis Bristol, MA '04, talks about what it takes for schools to hire and retain teachers of color.

Understanding racism in the criminal justice system

Research has shown that time and time again, inequality is embedded into all facets of the criminal justice system. From being arrested to being charged, convicted and sentenced, people of color – particularly Black men – are disproportionately targeted by the police.

“So many reforms are needed: police accountability, judicial intervention, reducing prosecutorial power and increasing resources for public defenders are places we can start,” said sociologist Matthew Clair . “But beyond piecemeal reforms, we need to continue having critical conversations about transformation and the role of the courts in bringing about the abolition of police and prisons.”

Clair is one of several Stanford scholars who have examined the intersection of race and the criminal process and offered solutions to end the vicious cycle of racism. Here is some of that work.

Police Facebook posts disproportionately highlight crimes involving Black suspects, study finds

Researchers examined crime-related posts from 14,000 Facebook pages maintained by U.S. law enforcement agencies and found that Facebook users are exposed to posts that overrepresent Black suspects by 25% relative to local arrest rates.

Supporting students involved in the justice system

New data show that a one-page letter asking a teacher to support a youth as they navigate the difficult transition from juvenile detention back to school can reduce the likelihood that the student re-offends.

Race and mass criminalization in the U.S.

Stanford sociologist discusses how race and class inequalities are embedded in the American criminal legal system.

New Stanford research lab explores incarcerated students’ educational paths

Associate Professor Subini Annamma examines the policies and practices that push marginalized students out of school and into prisons.

Derek Chauvin verdict important, but much remains to be done

Stanford scholars Hakeem Jefferson, Robert Weisberg and Matthew Clair weigh in on the Derek Chauvin verdict, emphasizing that while the outcome is important, much work remains to be done to bring about long-lasting justice.

A ‘veil of darkness’ reduces racial bias in traffic stops

After analyzing 95 million traffic stop records, filed by officers with 21 state patrol agencies and 35 municipal police forces from 2011 to 2018, researchers concluded that “police stops and search decisions suffer from persistent racial bias.”

Stanford big data study finds racial disparities in Oakland, Calif., police behavior, offers solutions

Analyzing thousands of data points, the researchers found racial disparities in how Oakland officers treated African Americans on routine traffic and pedestrian stops. They suggest 50 measures to improve police-community relations.

Race and the death penalty

As questions about racial bias in the criminal justice system dominate the headlines, research by Stanford law Professor John J. Donohue III offers insight into one of the most fraught areas: the death penalty.

Diagnosing disparities in health, medicine

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted communities of color and has highlighted the health disparities between Black Americans, whites and other demographic groups.

As Iris Gibbs , professor of radiation oncology and associate dean of MD program admissions, pointed out at an event sponsored by Stanford Medicine: “We need more sustained attention and real action towards eliminating health inequities, educating our entire community and going beyond ‘allyship,’ because that one fizzles out. We really do need people who are truly there all the way.”

Below is some of that research as well as solutions that can address some of the disparities in the American healthcare system.

Stanford researchers testing ways to improve clinical trial diversity

The American Heart Association has provided funding to two Stanford Medicine professors to develop ways to diversify enrollment in heart disease clinical trials.

Striking inequalities in maternal and infant health

Research by SIEPR’s Petra Persson and Maya Rossin-Slater finds wealthy Black mothers and infants in the U.S. fare worse than the poorest white mothers and infants.

More racial diversity among physicians would lead to better health among black men

A clinical trial in Oakland by Stanford researchers found that black men are more likely to seek out preventive care after being seen by black doctors compared to non-black doctors.

A better measuring stick: Algorithmic approach to pain diagnosis could eliminate racial bias

Traditional approaches to pain management don’t treat all patients the same. AI could level the playing field.

5 questions: Alice Popejoy on race, ethnicity and ancestry in science

Alice Popejoy, a postdoctoral scholar who studies biomedical data sciences, speaks to the role – and pitfalls – of race, ethnicity and ancestry in research.

Stanford Medicine community calls for action against racial injustice, inequities

The event at Stanford provided a venue for health care workers and students to express their feelings about violence against African Americans and to voice their demands for change.

Racial disparity remains in heart-transplant mortality rates, Stanford study finds

African-American heart transplant patients have had persistently higher mortality rates than white patients, but exactly why still remains a mystery.

Finding the COVID-19 Victims that Big Data Misses

Widely used virus tracking data undercounts older people and people of color. Scholars propose a solution to this demographic bias.

Studying how racial stressors affect mental health

Farzana Saleem, an assistant professor at Stanford Graduate School of Education, is interested in the way Black youth and other young people of color navigate adolescence—and the racial stressors that can make the journey harder.

Infants’ race influences quality of hospital care in California

Disparities exist in how babies of different racial and ethnic origins are treated in California’s neonatal intensive care units, but this could be changed, say Stanford researchers.

Immigrants don’t move state-to-state in search of health benefits

When states expand public health insurance to include low-income, legal immigrants, it does not lead to out-of-state immigrants moving in search of benefits.

Excess mortality rates early in pandemic highest among Blacks

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has been starkly uneven across race, ethnicity and geography, according to a new study led by SHP's Maria Polyakova.

Decoding bias in media, technology

Driving Artificial Intelligence are machine learning algorithms, sets of rules that tell a computer how to solve a problem, perform a task and in some cases, predict an outcome. These predictive models are based on massive datasets to recognize certain patterns, which according to communication scholar Angele Christin , sometimes come flawed with human bias . 

“Technology changes things, but perhaps not always as much as we think,” Christin said. “Social context matters a lot in shaping the actual effects of the technological tools. […] So, it’s important to understand that connection between humans and machines.”

Below is some of that research, as well as other ways discrimination unfolds across technology, in the media, and ways to counteract it.

IRS disproportionately audits Black taxpayers

A Stanford collaboration with the Department of the Treasury yields the first direct evidence of differences in audit rates by race.

Automated speech recognition less accurate for blacks

The disparity likely occurs because such technologies are based on machine learning systems that rely heavily on databases of English as spoken by white Americans.

New algorithm trains AI to avoid bad behaviors

Robots, self-driving cars and other intelligent machines could become better-behaved thanks to a new way to help machine learning designers build AI applications with safeguards against specific, undesirable outcomes such as racial and gender bias.

Stanford scholar analyzes responses to algorithms in journalism, criminal justice

In a recent study, assistant professor of communication Angèle Christin finds a gap between intended and actual uses of algorithmic tools in journalism and criminal justice fields.

Move responsibly and think about things

In the course CS 181: Computers, Ethics and Public Policy , Stanford students become computer programmers, policymakers and philosophers to examine the ethical and social impacts of technological innovation.

Homicide victims from Black and Hispanic neighborhoods devalued

Social scientists found that homicide victims killed in Chicago’s predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods received less news coverage than those killed in mostly white neighborhoods.

Algorithms reveal changes in stereotypes

New Stanford research shows that, over the past century, linguistic changes in gender and ethnic stereotypes correlated with major social movements and demographic changes in the U.S. Census data.

AI Index Diversity Report: An Unmoving Needle

Stanford HAI’s 2021 AI Index reveals stalled progress in diversifying AI and a scarcity of the data needed to fix it.

Identifying discrimination in the workplace and economy

From who moves forward in the hiring process to who receives funding from venture capitalists, research has revealed how Blacks and other minority groups are discriminated against in the workplace and economy-at-large. 

“There is not one silver bullet here that you can walk away with. Hiring and retention with respect to employee diversity are complex problems,” said Adina Sterling , associate professor of organizational behavior at the Graduate School of Business (GSB). 

Sterling has offered a few places where employers can expand employee diversity at their companies. For example, she suggests hiring managers track data about their recruitment methods and the pools that result from those efforts, as well as examining who they ultimately hire.

Here is some of that insight.

How To: Use a Scorecard to Evaluate People More Fairly

A written framework is an easy way to hold everyone to the same standard.

Archiving Black histories of Silicon Valley

A new collection at Stanford Libraries will highlight Black Americans who helped transform California’s Silicon Valley region into a hub for innovation, ideas.

Race influences professional investors’ judgments

In their evaluations of high-performing venture capital funds, professional investors rate white-led teams more favorably than they do black-led teams with identical credentials, a new Stanford study led by Jennifer L. Eberhardt finds.

Who moves forward in the hiring process?

People whose employment histories include part-time, temporary help agency or mismatched work can face challenges during the hiring process, according to new research by Stanford sociologist David Pedulla.

How emotions may result in hiring, workplace bias

Stanford study suggests that the emotions American employers are looking for in job candidates may not match up with emotions valued by jobseekers from some cultural backgrounds – potentially leading to hiring bias.

Do VCs really favor white male founders?

A field experiment used fake emails to measure gender and racial bias among startup investors.

Can you spot diversity? (Probably not)

New research shows a “spillover effect” that might be clouding your judgment.

Can job referrals improve employee diversity?

New research looks at how referrals impact promotions of minorities and women.

Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System

The Committee on Law and Justice will convene an ad hoc committee to review and assess existing evidence on how observed racial differences in criminal justice might be reduced through public policy. As appropriate, the committee will make evidence-driven policy and research recommendations for key criminal justice stakeholders with the ultimate goal of identifying ways to reduce racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system.

Frequently Asked Questions

Racial disparities in the justice system are well documented. Black Americans, Latinos, and Native Americans have greater exposure to the criminal justice system than native-born white Americans. Communities of color experience substantially greater levels of crime and victimization, are overrepresented as suspects and defendants, and are overrepresented in correctional facilities.   

Reducing racial inequality in the justice system has gained greater urgency and attention in recent years as government actions and policy solutions seek to rectify the problem, such as by reducing drug sentences. The study will explore what is known about inequality in the criminal justice system, and importantly, what the evidence can tell us about which policies and actions may be most effective in addressing it.  

A balanced and diverse committee will review and assess existing evidence on how racial differences in the criminal justice system might be reduced through public policy. The study will explore the societal forces that give rise to inequality in the justice system and their effects on racial inequality overall in the U.S. The committee’s final report will make evidence-based policy and research recommendations for key criminal justice stakeholders. The full statement of task is available here .

Yes. The National Academies regularly provides independent, objective analyses and advice to the nation to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions related to science, technology, and medicine. In addition, the National Academies has an extensive body of work on the criminal justice system. In 2015 the National Academies released The Growth of Incarceration in the United States , which examined the causes and consequences of increasing incarceration. The 2018 report Proactive Policing: Effects on Crime and Communities reviewed the evidence on proactive policing and evaluated its impacts on crime prevention and its broader implications for justice and U.S. communities.

The National Academies issued a call for nominations to stakeholders, National Academies members, and members of the public. Committee members were vetted to ensure that they did not have a conflict of interest and that the committee had balanced perspectives.

All meetings in which the committee gathers information are open to the public. Some will be livestreamed on the National Academies’ website, and presentations will be recorded and posted to this page.  

Registration for public committee meetings will be available under the Upcoming Events tab on the project page.

This report is scheduled to be released to the public in Summer 2022.

Yes. At information-gathering meetings, members of the public will be able to submit their comments to the committee. Members of the public may also submit written statements and relevant information to the committee via the study’s website throughout the course of the study, and through emails addressed to [email protected] .

The committee will produce a consensus report with evidence-based findings and recommendations that will be free and available to the public, after undergoing a rigorous external peer-review process. The final report will be directed towards criminal justice system stakeholders, policymakers, the public, and the scientific community, and will be delivered to the study sponsors, U.S. Congress, and the executive branch.

View the list of study sponsors.

Check this page for announcements, upcoming events, and new publications. Or, sign up for email updates from the Committee on Law & Justice using the form above. 

Publications

Reducing Racial Inequality in Crime and Justice: Science, Practice, and Policy

The history of the U.S. criminal justice system is marked by racial inequality and sustained by present day policy. Large racial and ethnic disparities exist across the several stages of criminal legal processing, including in arrests, pre-trial detention, and sentencing and incarceration, among others, with Black, Latino, and Native Americans experiencing worse outcomes. The historical legacy of racial exclusion and structural inequalities form the social context for racial inequalities in crime and criminal justice. Racial inequality can drive disparities in crime, victimization, and system involvement.

Reducing Racial Inequality in Crime and Justice: Science, Practice, and Policy synthesizes the evidence on community-based solutions, noncriminal policy interventions, and criminal justice reforms, charting a path toward the reduction of racial inequalities by minimizing harm in ways that also improve community safety. Reversing the effects of structural racism and severing the close connections between racial inequality, criminal harms such as violence, and criminal justice involvement will involve fostering local innovation and evaluation, and coordinating local initiatives with state and federal leadership.

This report also highlights the challenge of creating an accurate, national picture of racial inequality in crime and justice: there is a lack of consistent, reliable data, as well as data transparency and accountability. While the available data points toward trends that Black, Latino, and Native American individuals are overrepresented in the criminal justice system and given more severe punishments compared to White individuals, opportunities for improving research should be explored to better inform decision-making.

Read Full Description

• Report Highlights
• Policymaker Brief
• Issue Brief: Public Health and Health System Approaches
• Issue Brief: Community-driven Safety and Reducing Harm

Reducing Racial Inequalities in Criminal Justice: Data, Courts, and Systems of Supervision: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

The Committee on Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop in April 2021 as part of its exploration of ways to reduce racial inequalities in criminal justice outcomes in the United States. This workshop, the third in a series of three, enabled the committee to gather information from a diverse set of stakeholders and experts to inform the consensus study process. Speakers at the workshop presented on deeply rooted inequalities within the criminal justice system, which exist not only in readily measured areas such as incarceration, but also in a much larger footprint that includes contact with police, monetary sanctions, and surveillance and supervision. This publication highlights the presentations and discussion of the workshop.

Addressing the Drivers of Criminal Justice Involvement to Advance Racial Equity: Proceedings of a Workshop—in Brief

The Committee on Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop in March 2021 as part of its exploration of ways to reduce racial inequalities in criminal justice outcomes in the United States. This workshop, the second in a series of three, enabled the committee to gather information from a diverse set of stakeholders and experts to inform the consensus study process. Speakers discussed the numerous interrelated factors that shape racial inequalities in the criminal justice system. Presentations focused on issues and promising solutions in health and well-being, in both neighborhood and opportunity contexts, as well as in youth-serving systems, as they relate to reducing racial inequality. This publication highlights the presentations of the workshop.

Community Safety and Policing: Proceedings of a Workshop–in Brief

The Committee on Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine convened a workshop in January 2021 as part of its exploration of ways to reduce racial inequalities in criminal justice outcomes in the United States. In this workshop, speakers described the historical underpinnings that have linked policing with systemic racism and explored how policing in specific communities has shaped disparities in rates of crime and victimization across racial and ethnic groups. Speakers from both the criminal justice system and several communities spoke about how they are working to address racial inequalities today and about the problems of over-policing and under-protection in certain communities. This workshop, the first in a series of three, enabled the committee to gather information from a diverse set of stakeholders and experts to inform the consensus study process. This publication highlights the presentations of the workshop.

Description

An ad hoc committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will be appointed to review and assess existing evidence on how observed racial differences in criminal justice might be reduced through public policy. As appropriate, the committee will make evidence-driven policy and research recommendations for key criminal justice stakeholders with the ultimate goal of identifying ways to reduce racial disparities in the criminal justice system. The panel will examine: 1. What societal forces have given rise to current inequalities in criminal behavior, victimization, and criminal justice involvement? How effective are efforts to reduce racial differences in criminal justice involvement, criminal behavior, and victimization (e.g. through education, housing policy, employment initiatives, illicit drug intervention)? 2. How has the criminal justice system exacerbated racial inequality in the United States? How effective are efforts to reduce racial differences in criminal justice involvement (e.g., implicit bias training, bail reform policies, risk assessment tools, etc.)? 3. Which policies or approaches for reducing racial differences in crime and justice have suggestive evidence of effectiveness or appear promising but require further study? What areas of research and policy should scholars and practitioners explore to broaden the nation’s options to address racial inequalities in the justice system? The work will be done in two Phases. Phase I will host several data-gathering workshops to inform the committee’s final report. There will be a brief proceedings delivered after each workshop. Phase II will finalize the committee’s work and issue a final report according to institutional review guidelines.

• Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
• Committee on Law and Justice

Consensus Study

• Behavioral and Social Sciences
• Surveys and Statistics

Contact the Public Access Records Office to make an inquiry, request a list of the public access file materials, or obtain a copy of the materials found in the file.

Past Events

1:00PM - 2:00PM (ET)

June 13, 2023

2:00PM - 3:00PM (ET)

November 15, 2022

Multiday Event | March 9-10, 2022

[Closed] Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System: Meeting 9

Multiday Event | January 11-12, 2022

[Closed] Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System: Meeting 8

Multiday Event | October 21-22, 2021

[Closed] Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System: Meeting 7

Stacey Smit

(202) 334-1993

[email protected]

Responsible Staff Officers

• Emily Backes  

Additional Project Staff

• Natacha Blain  
• Stacey Smit  

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

It’s on Facebook, and it’s complicated

How far has COVID set back students?

What do anti-Jewish hate, anti-Muslim hate have in common?

Protesters take a knee in front of New York City police officers during a solidarity rally for George Floyd, June 4, 2020.

AP Photo/Frank Franklin II

Solving racial disparities in policing

Colleen Walsh

Harvard Staff Writer

Experts say approach must be comprehensive as roots are embedded in culture

“ Unequal ” is a multipart series highlighting the work of Harvard faculty, staff, students, alumni, and researchers on issues of race and inequality across the U.S. The first part explores the experience of people of color with the criminal justice legal system in America.

It seems there’s no end to them. They are the recent videos and reports of Black and brown people beaten or killed by law enforcement officers, and they have fueled a national outcry over the disproportionate use of excessive, and often lethal, force against people of color, and galvanized demands for police reform.

This is not the first time in recent decades that high-profile police violence — from the 1991 beating of Rodney King to the fatal shooting of Michael Brown in 2014 — ignited calls for change. But this time appears different. The police killings of Breonna Taylor in March, George Floyd in May, and a string of others triggered historic, widespread marches and rallies across the nation, from small towns to major cities, drawing protesters of unprecedented diversity in race, gender, and age.

According to historians and other scholars, the problem is embedded in the story of the nation and its culture. Rooted in slavery, racial disparities in policing and police violence, they say, are sustained by systemic exclusion and discrimination, and fueled by implicit and explicit bias. Any solution clearly will require myriad new approaches to law enforcement, courts, and community involvement, and comprehensive social change driven from the bottom up and the top down.

While police reform has become a major focus, the current moment of national reckoning has widened the lens on systemic racism for many Americans. The range of issues, though less familiar to some, is well known to scholars and activists. Across Harvard, for instance, faculty members have long explored the ways inequality permeates every aspect of American life. Their research and scholarship sits at the heart of a new Gazette series starting today aimed at finding ways forward in the areas of democracy; wealth and opportunity; environment and health; and education. It begins with this first on policing.

Harvard Kennedy School Professor Khalil Gibran Muhammad traces the history of policing in America to “slave patrols” in the antebellum South, in which white citizens were expected to help supervise the movements of enslaved Black people.

Photo by Martha Stewart

The history of racialized policing

Like many scholars, Khalil Gibran Muhammad , professor of history, race, and public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School , traces the history of policing in America to “slave patrols” in the antebellum South, in which white citizens were expected to help supervise the movements of enslaved Black people. This legacy, he believes, can still be seen in policing today. “The surveillance, the deputization essentially of all white men to be police officers or, in this case, slave patrollers, and then to dispense corporal punishment on the scene are all baked in from the very beginning,” he  told NPR  last year.

Slave patrols, and the slave codes they enforced, ended after the Civil War and the passage of the 13th amendment, which formally ended slavery “except as a punishment for crime.” But Muhammad notes that former Confederate states quickly used that exception to justify new restrictions. Known as the Black codes, the various rules limited the kinds of jobs African Americans could hold, their rights to buy and own property, and even their movements.

“The genius of the former Confederate states was to say, ‘Oh, well, if all we need to do is make them criminals and they can be put back in slavery, well, then that’s what we’ll do.’ And that’s exactly what the Black codes set out to do. The Black codes, for all intents and purposes, criminalized every form of African American freedom and mobility, political power, economic power, except the one thing it didn’t criminalize was the right to work for a white man on a white man’s terms.” In particular, he said the Ku Klux Klan “took about the business of terrorizing, policing, surveilling, and controlling Black people. … The Klan totally dominates the machinery of justice in the South.”

When, during what became known as the Great Migration, millions of African Americans fled the still largely agrarian South for opportunities in the thriving manufacturing centers of the North, they discovered that metropolitan police departments tended to enforce the law along racial and ethnic lines, with newcomers overseen by those who came before. “There was an early emphasis on people whose status was just a tiny notch better than the folks whom they were focused on policing,” Muhammad said. “And so the Anglo-Saxons are policing the Irish or the Germans are policing the Irish. The Irish are policing the Poles.” And then arrived a wave of Black Southerners looking for a better life.

In his groundbreaking work, “ The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America ,” Muhammad argues that an essential turning point came in the early 1900s amid efforts to professionalize police forces across the nation, in part by using crime statistics to guide law enforcement efforts. For the first time, Americans with European roots were grouped into one broad category, white, and set apart from the other category, Black.

Citing Muhammad’s research, Harvard historian Jill Lepore  has summarized the consequences this way : “Police patrolled Black neighborhoods and arrested Black people disproportionately; prosecutors indicted Black people disproportionately; juries found Black people guilty disproportionately; judges gave Black people disproportionately long sentences; and, then, after all this, social scientists, observing the number of Black people in jail, decided that, as a matter of biology, Black people were disproportionately inclined to criminality.”

“History shows that crime data was never objective in any meaningful sense,” Muhammad wrote. Instead, crime statistics were “weaponized” to justify racial profiling, police brutality, and ever more policing of Black people.

This phenomenon, he believes, has continued well into this century and is exemplified by William J. Bratton, one of the most famous police leaders in recent America history. Known as “America’s Top Cop,” Bratton led police departments in his native Boston, Los Angeles, and twice in New York, finally retiring in 2016.

Bratton rejected notions that crime was a result of social and economic forces, such as poverty, unemployment, police practices, and racism. Instead, he said in a 2017 speech, “It is about behavior.” Through most of his career, he was a proponent of statistically-based “predictive” policing — essentially placing forces in areas where crime numbers were highest, focused on the groups found there.

Bratton argued that the technology eliminated the problem of prejudice in policing, without ever questioning potential bias in the data or algorithms themselves — a significant issue given the fact that Black Americans are arrested and convicted of crimes at disproportionately higher rates than whites. This approach has led to widely discredited practices such as racial profiling and “stop-and-frisk.” And, Muhammad notes, “There is no research consensus on whether or how much violence dropped in cities due to policing.”

Gathering numbers

In 2015 The Washington Post began tracking every fatal shooting by an on-duty officer, using news stories, social media posts, and police reports in the wake of the fatal police shooting of Brown, a Black teenager in Ferguson, Mo. According to the newspaper, Black Americans are killed by police at twice the rate of white Americans, and Hispanic Americans are also killed by police at a disproportionate rate.

Such efforts have proved useful for researchers such as economist Rajiv Sethi .

A Joy Foundation Fellow at the Harvard  Radcliffe Institute , Sethi is investigating the use of lethal force by law enforcement officers, a difficult task given that data from such encounters is largely unavailable from police departments. Instead, Sethi and his team of researchers have turned to information collected by websites and news organizations including The Washington Post and The Guardian, merged with data from other sources such as the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Census, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

A Joy Foundation Fellow at the Harvard Radcliffe Institute, Rajiv Sethi is investigating the use of lethal force by law enforcement officers,

Courtesy photo

They have found that exposure to deadly force is highest in the Mountain West and Pacific regions relative to the mid-Atlantic and northeastern states, and that racial disparities in relation to deadly force are even greater than the national numbers imply. “In the country as a whole, you’re about two to three times more likely to face deadly force if you’re Black than if you are white” said Sethi. “But if you look at individual cities separately, disparities in exposure are much higher.”

Examining the characteristics associated with police departments that experience high numbers of lethal encounters is one way to better understand and address racial disparities in policing and the use of violence, Sethi said, but it’s a massive undertaking given the decentralized nature of policing in America. There are roughly 18,000 police departments in the country, and more than 3,000 sheriff’s offices, each with its own approaches to training and selection.

“They behave in very different ways, and what we’re finding in our current research is that they are very different in the degree to which they use deadly force,” said Sethi. To make real change, “You really need to focus on the agency level where organizational culture lies, where selection and training protocols have an effect, and where leadership can make a difference.”

Sethi pointed to the example of Camden, N.J., which disbanded and replaced its police force in 2013, initially in response to a budget crisis, but eventually resulting in an effort to fundamentally change the way the police engaged with the community. While there have been improvements, including greater witness cooperation, lower crime, and fewer abuse complaints, the Camden case doesn’t fit any particular narrative, said Sethi, noting that the number of officers actually increased as part of the reform. While the city is still faced with its share of problems, Sethi called its efforts to rethink policing “important models from which we can learn.”

Fighting vs. preventing crime

For many analysts, the real problem with policing in America is the fact that there is simply too much of it. “We’ve seen since the mid-1970s a dramatic increase in expenditures that are associated with expanding the criminal legal system, including personnel and the tasks we ask police to do,” said Sandra Susan Smith , Daniel and Florence Guggenheim Professor of Criminal Justice at HKS, and the Carol K. Pforzheimer Professor at the Radcliffe Institute. “And at the same time we see dramatic declines in resources devoted to social welfare programs.”

“You can have all the armored personnel carriers you want in Ferguson, but public safety is more likely to come from redressing environmental pollution, poor education, and unfair work,” said Brandon Terry, assistant professor of African and African American Studies and social studies.

Kris Snibble/Harvard file photo

Smith’s comment highlights a key argument embraced by many activists and experts calling for dramatic police reform: diverting resources from the police to better support community services including health care, housing, and education, and stronger economic and job opportunities. They argue that broader support for such measures will decrease the need for policing, and in turn reduce violent confrontations, particularly in over-policed, economically disadvantaged communities, and communities of color.

For Brandon Terry , that tension took the form of an ice container during his Baltimore high school chemistry final. The frozen cubes were placed in the middle of the classroom to help keep the students cool as a heat wave sent temperatures soaring. “That was their solution to the building’s lack of air conditioning,” said Terry, a Harvard assistant professor of African and African American Studies and social studies. “Just grab an ice cube.”

Terry’s story is the kind many researchers cite to show the negative impact of underinvesting in children who will make up the future population, and instead devoting resources toward policing tactics that embrace armored vehicles, automatic weapons, and spy planes. Terry’s is also the kind of tale promoted by activists eager to defund the police, a movement begun in the late 1960s that has again gained momentum as the death toll from violent encounters mounts. A scholar of Martin Luther King Jr., Terry said the Civil Rights leader’s views on the Vietnam War are echoed in the calls of activists today who are pressing to redistribute police resources.

“King thought that the idea of spending many orders of magnitude more for an unjust war than we did for the abolition of poverty and the abolition of ghettoization was a moral travesty, and it reflected a kind of sickness at the core of our society,” said Terry. “And part of what the defund model is based upon is a similar moral criticism, that these budgets reflect priorities that we have, and our priorities are broken.”

Terry also thinks the policing debate needs to be expanded to embrace a fuller understanding of what it means for people to feel truly safe in their communities. He highlights the work of sociologist Chris Muller and Harvard’s Robert Sampson, who have studied racial disparities in exposures to lead and the connections between a child’s early exposure to the toxic metal and antisocial behavior. Various studies have shown that lead exposure in children can contribute to cognitive impairment and behavioral problems, including heightened aggression.

“You can have all the armored personnel carriers you want in Ferguson,” said Terry, “but public safety is more likely to come from redressing environmental pollution, poor education, and unfair work.”

Policing and criminal justice system

Alexandra Natapoff , Lee S. Kreindler Professor of Law, sees policing as inexorably linked to the country’s criminal justice system and its long ties to racism.

“Policing does not stand alone or apart from how we charge people with crimes, or how we convict them, or how we treat them once they’ve been convicted,” she said. “That entire bundle of official practices is a central part of how we govern, and in particular, how we have historically governed Black people and other people of color, and economically and socially disadvantaged populations.”

Unpacking such a complicated issue requires voices from a variety of different backgrounds, experiences, and fields of expertise who can shine light on the problem and possible solutions, said Natapoff, who co-founded a new lecture series with HLS Professor Andrew Crespo titled “ Policing in America .”

In recent weeks the pair have hosted Zoom discussions on topics ranging from qualified immunity to the Black Lives Matter movement to police unions to the broad contours of the American penal system. The series reflects the important work being done around the country, said Natapoff, and offers people the chance to further “engage in dialogue over these over these rich, complicated, controversial issues around race and policing, and governance and democracy.”

Courts and mass incarceration

Much of Natapoff’s recent work emphasizes the hidden dangers of the nation’s misdemeanor system. In her book “ Punishment Without Crime: How Our Massive Misdemeanor System Traps the Innocent and Makes America More Unequal ,” Natapoff shows how the practice of stopping, arresting, and charging people with low-level offenses often sends them down a devastating path.

“This is how most people encounter the criminal apparatus, and it’s the first step of mass incarceration, the initial net that sweeps people of color disproportionately into the criminal system,” said Natapoff. “It is also the locus that overexposes Black people to police violence. The implications of this enormous net of police and prosecutorial authority around minor conduct is central to understanding many of the worst dysfunctions of our criminal system.”

One consequence is that Black and brown people are incarcerated at much higher rates than white people. America has approximately 2.3 million people in federal, state, and local prisons and jails, according to a 2020 report from the nonprofit the Prison Policy Initiative. According to a 2018 report from the Sentencing Project, Black men are 5.9 times as likely to be incarcerated as white men and Hispanic men are 3.1 times as likely.

Reducing mass incarceration requires shrinking the misdemeanor net “along all of its axes” said Natapoff, who supports a range of reforms including training police officers to both confront and arrest people less for low-level offenses, and the policies of forward-thinking prosecutors willing to “charge fewer of those offenses when police do make arrests.”

She praises the efforts of Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins in Massachusetts and George Gascón, the district attorney in Los Angeles County, Calif., who have pledged to stop prosecuting a range of misdemeanor crimes such as resisting arrest, loitering, trespassing, and drug possession. “If cities and towns across the country committed to that kind of reform, that would be a profoundly meaningful change,” said Natapoff, “and it would be a big step toward shrinking our entire criminal apparatus.”

Retired U.S. Judge Nancy Gertner cites the need to reform federal sentencing guidelines, arguing that all too often they have been proven to be biased and to result in packing the nation’s jails and prisons.

Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard file photo

Sentencing reform

Another contributing factor in mass incarceration is sentencing disparities.

A recent Harvard Law School study found that, as is true nationally, people of color are “drastically overrepresented in Massachusetts state prisons.” But the report also noted that Black and Latinx people were less likely to have their cases resolved through pretrial probation ­— a way to dismiss charges if the accused meet certain conditions — and receive much longer sentences than their white counterparts.

Retired U.S. Judge Nancy Gertner also notes the need to reform federal sentencing guidelines, arguing that all too often they have been proven to be biased and to result in packing the nation’s jails and prisons. She points to the way the 1994 Crime Bill (legislation sponsored by then-Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware) ushered in much harsher drug penalties for crack than for powder cocaine. This tied the hands of judges issuing sentences and disproportionately punished people of color in the process. “The disparity in the treatment of crack and cocaine really was backed up by anecdote and stereotype, not by data,” said Gertner, a lecturer at HLS. “There was no data suggesting that crack was infinitely more dangerous than cocaine. It was the young Black predator narrative.”

The First Step Act, a bipartisan prison reform bill aimed at reducing racial disparities in drug sentencing and signed into law by President Donald Trump in 2018, is just what its name implies, said Gertner.

“It reduces sentences to the merely inhumane rather than the grotesque. We still throw people in jail more than anybody else. We still resort to imprisonment, rather than thinking of other alternatives. We still resort to punishment rather than other models. None of that has really changed. I don’t deny the significance of somebody getting out of prison a year or two early, but no one should think that that’s reform.”

 Not just bad apples

Reform has long been a goal for federal leaders. Many heralded Obama-era changes aimed at eliminating racial disparities in policing and outlined in the report by The President’s Task Force on 21st Century policing. But HKS’s Smith saw them as largely symbolic. “It’s a nod to reform. But most of the reforms that are implemented in this country tend to be reforms that nibble around the edges and don’t really make much of a difference.”

Efforts such as diversifying police forces and implicit bias training do little to change behaviors and reduce violent conduct against people of color, said Smith, who cites studies suggesting a majority of Americans hold negative biases against Black and brown people, and that unconscious prejudices and stereotypes are difficult to erase.

“Experiments show that you can, in the context of a day, get people to think about race differently, and maybe even behave differently. But if you follow up, say, a week, or two weeks later, those effects are gone. We don’t know how to produce effects that are long-lasting. We invest huge amounts to implement such police reforms, but most often there’s no empirical evidence to support their efficacy.”

Even the early studies around the effectiveness of body cameras suggest the devices do little to change “officers’ patterns of behavior,” said Smith, though she cautions that researchers are still in the early stages of collecting and analyzing the data.

And though police body cameras have caught officers in unjust violence, much of the general public views the problem as anomalous.

“Despite what many people in low-income communities of color think about police officers, the broader society has a lot of respect for police and thinks if you just get rid of the bad apples, everything will be fine,” Smith added. “The problem, of course, is this is not just an issue of bad apples.”

Efforts such as diversifying police forces and implicit bias training do little to change behaviors and reduce violent conduct against people of color, said Sandra Susan Smith, a professor of criminal justice Harvard Kennedy School.

Community-based ways forward

Still Smith sees reason for hope and possible ways forward involving a range of community-based approaches. As part of the effort to explore meaningful change, Smith, along with Christopher Winship , Diker-Tishman Professor of Sociology at Harvard University and a member of the senior faculty at HKS, have organized “ Reimagining Community Safety: A Program in Criminal Justice Speaker Series ” to better understand the perspectives of practitioners, policymakers, community leaders, activists, and academics engaged in public safety reform.

Some community-based safety models have yielded important results. Smith singles out the Crisis Assistance Helping Out on the Streets program (known as CAHOOTS ) in Eugene, Ore., which supplements police with a community-based public safety program. When callers dial 911 they are often diverted to teams of workers trained in crisis resolution, mental health, and emergency medicine, who are better equipped to handle non-life-threatening situations. The numbers support her case. In 2017 the program received 25,000 calls, only 250 of which required police assistance. Training similar teams of specialists who don’t carry weapons to handle all traffic stops could go a long way toward ending violent police encounters, she said.

“Imagine you have those kinds of services in play,” said Smith, paired with community-based anti-violence program such as Cure Violence , which aims to stop violence in targeted neighborhoods by using approaches health experts take to control disease, such as identifying and treating individuals and changing social norms. Together, she said, these programs “could make a huge difference.”

At Harvard Law School, students have been  studying how an alternate 911-response team  might function in Boston. “We were trying to move from thinking about a 911-response system as an opportunity to intervene in an acute moment, to thinking about what it would look like to have a system that is trying to help reweave some of the threads of community, a system that is more focused on healing than just on stopping harm” said HLS Professor Rachel Viscomi, who directs the Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program and oversaw the research.

The forthcoming report, compiled by two students in the HLS clinic, Billy Roberts and Anna Vande Velde, will offer officials a range of ideas for how to think about community safety that builds on existing efforts in Boston and other cities, said Viscomi.

But Smith, like others, knows community-based interventions are only part of the solution. She applauds the Justice Department’s investigation into the Ferguson Police Department after the shooting of Brown. The 102-page report shed light on the department’s discriminatory policing practices, including the ways police disproportionately targeted Black residents for tickets and fines to help balance the city’s budget. To fix such entrenched problems, state governments need to rethink their spending priorities and tax systems so they can provide cities and towns the financial support they need to remain debt-free, said Smith.

Rethinking the 911-response system to being one that is “more focused on healing than just on stopping harm” is part of the student-led research under the direction of Law School Professor Rachel Viscomi, who heads up the Harvard Negotiation and Mediation Clinical Program.

Jon Chase/Harvard file photo

“Part of the solution has to be a discussion about how government is funded and how a city like Ferguson got to a place where government had so few resources that they resorted to extortion of their residents, in particular residents of color, in order to make ends meet,” she said. “We’ve learned since that Ferguson is hardly the only municipality that has struggled with funding issues and sought to address them through the oppression and repression of their politically, socially, and economically marginalized Black and Latino residents.”

Police contracts, she said, also need to be reexamined. The daughter of a “union man,” Smith said she firmly supports officers’ rights to union representation to secure fair wages, health care, and safe working conditions. But the power unions hold to structure police contracts in ways that protect officers from being disciplined for “illegal and unethical behavior” needs to be challenged, she said.

“I think it’s incredibly important for individuals to be held accountable and for those institutions in which they are embedded to hold them to account. But we routinely find that union contracts buffer individual officers from having to be accountable. We see this at the level of the Supreme Court as well, whose rulings around qualified immunity have protected law enforcement from civil suits. That needs to change.”

Other Harvard experts agree. In an opinion piece in The Boston Globe last June, Tomiko Brown-Nagin , dean of the Harvard Radcliffe Institute and the Daniel P.S. Paul Professor of Constitutional Law at HLS, pointed out the Court’s “expansive interpretation of qualified immunity” and called for reform that would “promote accountability.”

“This nation is devoted to freedom, to combating racial discrimination, and to making government accountable to the people,” wrote Brown-Nagin. “Legislators today, like those who passed landmark Civil Rights legislation more than 50 years ago, must take a stand for equal justice under law. Shielding police misconduct offends our fundamental values and cannot be tolerated.”

Share this article

You might like.

‘Spermworld’ documentary examines motivations of prospective parents, volunteer donors who connect through private group page 

An economist, a policy expert, and a teacher explain why learning losses are worse than many parents realize

Researchers scrutinize various facets of these types of bias, and note sometimes they both reside within the same person.

Epic science inside a cubic millimeter of brain

Researchers publish largest-ever dataset of neural connections

Excited about new diet drug? This procedure seems better choice.

Study finds minimally invasive treatment more cost-effective over time, brings greater weight loss

Criminal Justice

In May of 2020, the death of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police sparked a national conversation on racism in policing. The conversation was long overdue. While Floyd’s death was a wake-up call for many, it was also the latest evidence of systemic, anti-Black racism in the United States criminal justice system.

Since the 1600s, racist stereotypes have permeated American society and shaped its criminal justice system. Some of the first organized “police forces” in the United States were slave patrols in the American South, and as policing evolved, disparities in the treatment of Black and white Americans did not.

During the 1980s, the federal government’s strategy to counter illegal drug use shifted from treatment and poverty reduction programs to increased incarceration, penalties, and enforcement for drug offenders. The prison population skyrocketed over the next several decades — in 1972 there were only 200,000 people incarcerated in the United States, while there are now more than 2.2 million. The trend of mass incarceration has meant mostly Black incarceration. Black Americans currently represent one-third of the incarcerated population, even though they make up only an eighth of American adults.

Today, Black Americans are more likely to be arrested, convicted, and given harsher sentences than white Americans who commit the same crimes. They receive much greater police scrutiny than those who are not Black — for instance, they use drugs at the same rates as other races and ethnicities but make up nearly 1 in 3 arrests for drug use. And they suffer deadly police violence at a greater rate than non-Black Americans, as the family of George Floyd knows all too well.

Our criminal justice system’s violence and inequality toward Black Americans is fueled by a long history of racism that frames Black people as inherently dangerous criminals. Positively transforming criminal justice in the United States will require confronting this history and implementing policy based in fairness and accountability.

Sources for the information above are cited at the bottom of this page.

Explore a curated sample of Harvard research and resources related to anti-Black racism in criminal justice below.

The great decoupling: the disconnection between criminal offending and experience of arrest across two cohorts.

Contact with the criminal justice system should only occur when one commits a crime. This study reveals how police arrests are increasingly informed by race instead of criminal behavior.

Unfair by Design: The War on Drugs, Race, and the Legitimacy of the Criminal Justice System

Equality before the law is one of the fundamental guarantees citizens expect in a just and fair society. This study explains how the recent trend toward mass incarceration, which has a disproportionate impact on African Americans, undermines this claim to fairness.

The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America (HarvardKey Only)

The idea of Black people as innately dangerous and criminal is deeply ingrained in the United States. This book traces the history of this notion and reveals how social scientists and reformers used crime statistics to mask and excuse anti-black racism, violence, and discrimination across the nation.

Punishment without Crime: How Our Massive Misdemeanor System Traps the Innocent and Makes America More Unequal (HarvardKey Only)

This book examines inequality in the criminal justice system through an in-depth look at misdemeanors. It reveals a sprawling system that punishes the innocent and disproportionately targets low-income people of color.

Visualizing Police Exposure by Race, Gender, and Age in New York City

This data visualization depicts the disparities in average police stops in New York City from 2004 to 2012. It illustrates that Black men and women are more likely than their peers to be exposed to policing.

Racial Disparities in the Massachusetts Criminal System

People of color are drastically overrepresented in Massachusetts state prisons. This report explores the factors that lead to persistent racial disparities in the Massachusetts criminal system.

American Policing and Protest || Radcliffe Institute

The United States has a long history of police violence against people of color. In this panel, experts discuss the historical roots of policing and ways to create a fair criminal justice system.

PolicyCast: A Historic Crossroads for Systemic Racism and Policing in America

In this podcast Harvard Kennedy School professors Khalil Gibran Muhammad and Erica Chenoweth discuss police brutality, addressing systemic racism in criminal justice, and social movements.

Citations for Section Overview

• Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopedia. "War on Drugs." Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/war-on-drugs
• Ghandnoosh, Nazgol. 2015. “Black Lives Matter: Eliminating Racial Inequity in the Criminal Justice System.” The Sentencing Project. February 3, 2015. https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/black-lives-matter-eliminating-racial-inequity-in-the-criminal-justice-system/.
• Mauer, Marc. 2011. “Addressing Racial Disparities in Incarceration.” The Prison Journal 91 (3): 87S-101S. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032885511415227
• Muhammad, Khalil Gibran. 2019. The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America, with a New Preface. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. http://id.lib.harvard.edu/alma/990120310410203941/catalog.
• Parker, Kim, Juliana Menasce Horowitz, and Monica Anderson. 2020. “Amid Protests, Majorities Across Racial and Ethnic Groups Express Support for the Black Lives Matter Movement.” Pew Research Center. June 12, 2020. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/06/12/amid-protests-majorities-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups-express-support-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/.
• “Racial Justice.” n.d. Equal Justice Initiative. Accessed February 3, 2021. https://eji.org/racial-justice/.

Citations for Page Images

• Interior of Strafford County Jail, New Hampshire | Unidentified Artist. Crime, Prisons: United States. New Hampshire. Dover. Strafford County Jail: New Hampshire State Charitable and Correctional Institutions: Interior - Strafford County Jail., 1902. http://id.lib.harvard.edu/images/HUAM313572soc/catalog
• A young Black girl in a Georgia prison cell, 1963 | Young girls being held in a prison cell at the Leesburg stockade. Part of Barbara Deming Papers. Folder: Alphabetical Correspondence: Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC): Photographs, 1963. RLG collection level record MHVW92-A44. http://id.lib.harvard.edu/images/olvgroup1003350/urn-3:RAD.SCHL:258877/catalog 
• A New York City demonstration against discriminatory policing, 1976 | Lane, Bettye. Police and Jewish demonstration in Crown Heights , 1976. Part of Bettye Lane Photographs. Folder: Crown Heights demonstration. Schlesinger Library on the History of Women in America, Radcliffe Institute PC32-136-R8/f12. http://id.lib.harvard.edu/images/8000905528/catalog

• State Profiles

Advocacy Toolkit

• Fact Sheets

Stay Informed

Get the latest updates:

Can you make a tax-deductible gift to support our work?

Visualizing the racial disparities in mass incarceration

Racial inequality is evident in every stage of the criminal justice system - here are the key statistics compiled into a series of charts..

by Wendy Sawyer , July 27, 2020

Recent protests calling for radical changes to American policing have brought much-needed attention to the systemic racism within our criminal justice system. This extends beyond policing, of course: Systemic racism is evident at every stage of the system , from policing to prosecutorial decisions, pretrial release processes, sentencing, correctional discipline, and even reentry. The racism inherent in mass incarceration affects children as well as adults, and is often especially punishing for people of color who are also marginalized along other lines, such as gender and class.

Because racial disparity data is often frustratingly hard to locate, we’ve compiled the key data available into a series of charts, arranged into five slideshows focused on policing , juvenile justice , jails and pretrial detention, prisons and sentencing, and reentry . These charts provide a fuller picture of racial inequality in the criminal justice system, and make clear that a broad transformation will be needed to uproot the racial injustice of mass incarceration.

Following the slideshows, we also address five frequently asked questions about criminal justice race/ethnicity data.

There are racial disparities in policing and arrests:

There are racial disparities in the arrest and confinement of youth:

There are racial disparities in local jails and pretrial detention:

There are racial disparities in prisons, extreme sentences, and solitary confinement:

There are racial disparities in homelessness, unemployment, and poverty after release:

Frequently asked questions about race and ethnicity in criminal justice data

Q: why are terms used inconsistently, such as “hispanic” and “latino/a”.

A: Sharp-eyed readers will notice some inconsistency in the terms used in the charts above, and across the literature more generally. For example, the Census Bureau and most national criminal justice data uses the category “American Indian or Alaska Native” to describe indigenous people in the U.S., but the juvenile justice system data uses the term “American Indian.” Likewise, “Hispanic” is used most frequently in various national data sets to refer to those with Spanish-speaking ancestry, but some sources use Latino/a (or Latinx), which specifically refers to those with Latin American ancestry. In these charts (and in most of our publications), we use the terminology of the original data sources.

Q: Why are some racial/ethnic categories not represented in the data?

A: The question of how accurately race and ethnicity data reflect justice-involved populations goes beyond inconsistent labels. Most obviously, not all racial or ethnic groups are consistently represented in the data; less populous Census-identified groups, such as Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, Asian, and American Indian or Alaska Native – as well as the sizable but less specific “Two or more races” and “Some other race” – are very often excluded in publications, even when they are collected. Moreover, all of these categories are so broad that they lump together groups with very different experiences with the U.S. justice system. They disregard tribal differences, sweep people of East Asian and South Asian origins into one category, and somehow ignore Arab Americans entirely. As a result, our observations of racial and ethnic discrimination are limited to these broad categories and lack any real nuance.

Q: Where can I find data about racial disparities in my state’s criminal justice system?

A: Unfortunately, the more specific you want to get with race/ethnicity data, the harder it is to find an answer, especially one that’s up-to-date. State-level race and ethnicity data can be hard to find if you are looking to federal government sources like the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). BJS does publish state-level race and ethnicity data in its annual Prisoners series ( Appendix Table 2 in 2018), but only every 6-7 years in its Jail Inmates series (most recently the 2013 Census of Jails report, Table 7 ). The Vera Institute of Justice has attempted to fill this gap with its Incarceration Trends project, by gathering additional data from individual states. Individual state Departments of Correction sometimes collect and/or publish more up-to-date and specific data; it’s worth checking with your own state’s agencies.

Q: Where can I find criminal justice race/ethnicity data disaggregated by sex?

A: Disaggregating racial/ethnic data by sex is unfortunately not the norm in reports produced by the federal government (i.e. BJS). For people able to access and analyze the raw data, such analyses are often possible, but most people rely on the reports published by government agencies like BJS. As you can see in the chart showing prison incarceration rates by sex and race/ethnicity, BJS does sometimes offer this level of detail. But again, the same level of detail is not available for jails, and an analysis of both race/ethnicity and sex by state is all but unheard-of – even though it is precisely this level of detail that is most useful for advocates trying to help specific populations in their state.

Q: How are the data collected, and how accurate are the data?

A: Finally, the validity of any data depends on how the data are collected in the first place. And in the case of criminal justice data, race and ethnicity are not always self-reported (which would be ideal). Police officers may report an individual’s race based on their own perception – or not report it at all – and the surveys that report the number of incarcerated people on a given day rely on administrative data, which may not reflect how individuals identify their own race or ethnicity. This is why surveys of incarcerated people themselves are so important, such as the Survey of Inmates in Local Jails and the Survey of Prison Inmates, but those surveys are conducted much less frequently. In fact, it’s been 18 years since the last Survey of Inmates in Local Jails, which we use to analyze pretrial jail populations, and 16 years since the last published data from the Survey of Inmates were collected.

How to link to specific images

Because some readers might want to link to specific images in this briefing out of the context of these slideshows, we’ve created these special URLs so you can link directly to a specific image:

Wendy Sawyer is the Prison Policy Initiative Research Director. ( Other articles | Full bio | Contact )

Related briefings:

• New report: The Racial Geography of Mass Incarceration  +
• Updated charts provide insights on racial disparities, correctional control, jail suicides, and more  +
• Racial disparities in diversion: A research roundup  +

Recommended Reading:

Resources, tips, and best practices to help advocates working to end mass incarceration.

50 state incarceration profiles

All of our recent reports about prison/jail growth, racial disparities, and more, re-organized by state.

Mass Incarceration: The Whole Pie

The U.S. incarcerates over 1.9 million people, more than any other country. Where are they locked up and why? Read our report.

Shadow Budgets

How mass incarceration steals from the poor to give to the prison

• Competition
• Inequality & Mobility
• Tax & Macroeconomics
• Value Added
• Elevating Research
• Connect with an Expert
• In the Media
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy

Connect with us

• Washington Center for Equitable Growth
• 740 15th St. NW 8th Floor
• Washington, D.C. 20005
• Phone: 202.545.6002

Overcoming social exclusion: Addressing race and criminal justice policy in the United States

February 18, 2020.

Economic Inequality

Economic Mobility

Economic Wellbeing

Race & Ethnicity

This essay is part of Vision 2020: Evidence for a stronger economy , a compilation of 21 essays presenting innovative, evidence-based, and concrete ideas to shape the 2020 policy debate. The authors in the new book include preeminent economists, political scientists, and sociologists who use cutting-edge research methods to answer some of the thorniest economic questions facing policymakers today. 

To read more about the Vision 2020 book and download the full collection of essays, click here .

The United States incarcerates more people than any other country in the world, at a rate of 860 per 100,000 U.S. residents age 18 or older. 1 The majority of the growth in the nation’s prison population can be attributed to changes in public policies . 2 By the mid to late 1970s, American society became more punitive, and the shift in demand for more retributive policies led to an exponential increase in the incarceration rate.

Specifically, many states moved from indeterminate sentencing systems to determinate ones. Determinate sentencing systems set fixed or narrow ranges for statutory terms outlined for each crime, which replaced the sentencing discretion of judges, where the exact sentence is unknown but typically has a wider range, and discretionary parole boards. Determinate sentencing led to more draconian sentencing policies such as mandatory minimums (state statutes requiring individuals to be imprisoned for a definite amount of time), truth-in-sentencing laws (which limit the possibility of early release by requiring those imprisoned to serve a significant proportion of their prison sentence), and three-strikes laws (which result in more severe prison punishments after a third criminal offense).

These policies resulted in more individuals being incarcerated for less serious offenses, as well as individuals being incarcerated for longer periods of time. While incarceration is the most visible representation of the misaligned U.S. criminal justice system, less discussed is the number of individuals who have a criminal record in general, and a felony conviction in particular, within the United States. According to the 2014 Bureau of Justice Statistics Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems, there are more than 100 million recorded criminal records in the United States. 3 University of Georgia sociologist Sarah K.S. Shannon and her co-authors estimate that by 2010, there were 18 million Americans with a felony conviction compared to a little more than 7 million who have been incarcerated. 4

While it is generally accepted that changes in public policy are responsible for the expansion of the modern U.S. penal system over the past five decades, what is less clear is how ostensibly colorblind policies led to the concentrated incarceration we see today within minority communities and especially African American communities. Harvard University historian and African American studies professor Elizabeth Hinton persuasively argues that the infrastructure necessary for the growth in incarceration began during an era of liberal reform amid the Civil Rights period with the passage of the 1965 Law Enforcement Assistance Act, which marshalled in an era of law enforcement and a focus on fighting racial and economic inequality through the vehicle of law enforcement instead of social programming. 5

Largely in response to the civil unrest that stemmed from urban protests against police brutality, targeted crime-control policies led to increased supervision of black urban communities, especially black youth, which ultimately led to mass incarceration. Racialized perceptions of crime and poverty led the federal government to use a punitive approach to poverty alleviation and racial economic justice. 6 Indeed, an often overlooked topic within the mass incarceration discussion is the national crime-control policies that provided the funding and incentives that guided state governments to adopt more punitive laws. As Hinton asserts:

The federal government’s long mobilization of the War on Crime promoted a particular type of social control, one that signals that the targeted arrest of racially marginalized Americans and the subsequent creation of new industries to support this regime of control are among the central characteristics of domestic policy in the late twentieth century. 7

This last point should not be lost, as many localities in the nation unsuccessfully used prison construction as economic growth engines. 8

The purpose of this essay is twofold. The first is to argue for a shift in focus away from dealing with economic inequality through the lens of the criminal justice system—which is ill-equipped to address the root causes of poverty and racial inequality, and may actually increase social costs in the long run. The second is to argue for a widespread audit of current federal crime-control policies and funding, not only to understand whether their social benefits outweigh their social costs, but also to determine and eradicate the policies that are leading to greater racial disparities within the criminal justice system.

The essay begins with a brief discussion of race and crime, then moves on to discuss the relationship between federal crime-control policies and racial disparities in the criminal justice system. I then conclude with some policy recommendations, among them concerted federal efforts to understand and document the historic and still-prevalent role of racial bias in our criminal justice system, and the education of the American public on the persistence and consequences of these biases.

Understanding our past: Race and the criminal justice system in the United States

Toward the end of his life, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. began fighting for economic justice because he understood that up to that point, American society had paid very little to enact civil rights legislation, and there could be no true social justice and inclusion of African Americans without economic justice. 9 King also seemed to realize that an important component in the fight for equity, justice, and social inclusion was for white people to “reeducate themselves out of their racial ignorance.” 10

Specifically, he noted that black people were putting in a mass effort to overcome the oppression that had hindered their progress over the years. Yet white people, King pointed out, were not as determined to overcome their racial obliviousness, arguing that considerable investments were required to close the racial gap, to accommodate black neighbors, and to enforce bona fide school integration—all of which were still terrifying for many white Americans.

More than 50 years later, there has been no meaningful racial education and only limited inclusion of black people within the social and economic fabric of the United States. Schools are just as racially segregated , if not more, than they were 25–30 years ago. 11 Neighborhoods and communities across the country are still broadly divided along racial lines . 12 Moreover, the racial wealth gap has persisted over time and is about the same level it was in 1962 . 13

Along the way, the United States has achieved the highest incarceration rate in the world, with its prisons disproportionately filled with black descendants of their enslaved ancestors: African American men born in 2001 have roughly a 1 in 3 chance of being imprisoned (roughly 5.5 times their white counterparts), while an African American woman born in 2001 has a 1 in 18 chance of being imprisoned (roughly 6 times their white counterparts). 14 (See Figure 1.)

Consider the disproportionality in state and federal prison admissions rates from 1926 to 1993 by race. It should be noted that even in 1926, African American state and federal prison admission rates were more than twice the admission rates of white people, and this continued to increase over time. Yet admission rates began to increase at a much steeper rate for black Americans than for white Americans beginning in the mid-1970s through 1993, such that black admission rates were 7.6 times the white rate by 1993. Imprisonment rates by race from 1988 to 2010 show a similarly large disparity between black people and white people. (See Figure 2.)

Political science research suggests a duality in the way that society chooses to punish based on who is punished. Professors Jon Hurwitz at the University of Pittsburgh and Mark Peffley at the University of Kentucky find that when white people are asked about how to address violent crime in general, and violent “inner city” crime in particular, respondents are more likely to prefer to build prisons to combat violent “inner city” crime—and this is true particularly among white people who hold negative stereotypes about black people and who view the criminal justice system as racially fair. 15 In this context, “inner city” is used as a codeword for black.

Mainstream society’s view of black people as a degenerate race of inferior intellect, prone to criminal behavior, and incapable of governing themselves is a long-held belief that predates mass incarceration or even the unrest during the civil rights era. 16 These highly racialized views and perspectives played an important role in the intellectual history of the United States in the 19th and early 20th centuries. American Polygeny, or the belief that human races stem from different species, was one of the primary theories to gain recognition on the international science arena at that time. 17 This scientific movement developed right before the American Civil War, during a time of uncertainty when the country was fervent about establishing racial inequalities. 18

Indeed, the legacy of these racist beliefs spurred the intellectual and political foundation that time and time again led to social investment in policies that reinforced racial inequality and social control, such as black codes and convict leasing. It also laid the groundwork for the Jim Crow laws that took root at the end of Reconstruction in 1877 to limit the full participation of African Americans in the U.S. labor market, voting, residential preferences, and education. These regulations, along with the civil unrest protesting police brutality and other marginalizing institutions in black communities, paved the way in the 20th century for the integration of crime control and equal opportunity programs. 19

Specifically, it was during President Lyndon Johnson’s “Great Society” in the 1960s that anti-poverty programs became intertwined with anti-crime programs, thereby setting the foundation for the mass incarceration policies of the past several decades. In fact, President Johnson’s Law Enforcement Assistance Act ended 200 years of domestic law-enforcement policy by instituting federal authority over local policing procedures. 20

Federal crime-control policies and racial disparities in the criminal justice system

This section of the essay reviews some of the unintended consequences of these major crime-control policies—such as the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Program, or Byrne Program, which provided federal funding for state and local drug law enforcement efforts—to show how colorblind policies could lead to racially biased results. Conceivably, financial incentives from intergovernmental grant programs and civil asset forfeiture laws, together with U.S. Supreme Court decisions awarding police extraordinary power to stop and search residents with minimal to no probable cause, contributed to the disproportionate policing and imprisonment of African Americans. 21

A 1993 report by the congressional General Accounting Office (now the Government Accountability Office) found that federal grants provided under the Byrne Program were “the primary source of federal financial assistance for state and local drug law enforcement efforts.” 22 These types of grants could lead to changes in policing and prosecution—if, for example, they enhanced collaboration between police and prosecutors—for drug and violent crimes. 23

In fact, one of the key policing innovations stemming from the Byrne Program was multijurisdictional drug task forces. But some of these multijurisdictional task forces—such as the South Central Narcotics Task Force in Texas, which, at one point, arrested 15 percent of the young black men in the city of Hearne in one drug raid—have become infamous for their selective enforcement of African Americans. 24

The case of Hearne, Texas is especially egregious: The South Central Narcotics Task Force conducted raids in the black community each year for 15 years under the direction of District Attorney John Paschall with the intent to “round up the n*****s.” 25 Even though white and Hispanic people in the community were participating in drug activity at the same rates, there was a deliberate focus on the black community, according to an American Civil Liberties Union legal complaint. 26 In fact, the same ACLU legal complaint specifically states that Paschall was open about his desire to rid Hearne of its black population using incarceration.

I and my co-author, Jamein Cunningham at the University of Memphis’ Department of Economics, investigate the effect of the Byrne Program on crime and black and white arrests. 27 We find this program significantly increased the number of drug sales arrests for white and black people, although the marginal effect on drug sales arrests for African Americans is much larger, suggesting that this program may have exacerbated already-present racial disparities in arrests. Although the Byrne Program also targeted violent crime, there is little evidence of significant changes for violent crime arrests.

While our analysis cannot specifically pinpoint the mechanism through which police increased arrests for drug sales by black people, such as by selective enforcement due to racial animus or implicit bias, sociologists Katherine Beckett, Kris Nyrop, and Lori Pfingst at the University of Washington find evidence of selective enforcement of African Americans in Seattle. Their research finds that selective enforcement was due to organizational practices established by policies driven by implicit racial bias and not the more common reasons provided for differences in arrests, such as differences in the structure of drug markets between drugs used and sold by black and white people or greater community complaints by black people. 28 University of Chicago economist Derek Neal and Cornell University management professor Armin Rick also find that due to historical differences in arrest rates, mass incarceration policies disproportionately affect African American communities. 29

Similarly, Emily Weisburst at UCLA’s Luskin School of Public Affairs, using data from Texas, finds that federal grant funds for school police from the Community Oriented Policing Services’ Cops in Schools program raises middle school discipline rates by 6 percent per year, and this increase is mostly driven by low-level infractions. 30 Moreover, black students experience the greatest increase in their discipline rates. She estimates that a student who attends a school district that received one 3-year grant is 2.5 percent less likely to graduate high school and has a 4 percent reduced chance of enrolling in college.

While these crime-control policies were seemingly colorblind, they were certainly not race neutral in their effect.

Effective criminal justice policy

The United States’ history of racial bias and animus is so engrained in the soul of the country that failure to acknowledge and atone for its presence in the intellectual, political, and cultural fabric of our society allows for its continued reproduction. 31 What’s more, the failure to recognize the intricate connection of racial bias to systems of social control, such as the criminal justice system, leads to challenges to the implementation of race-neutral public policy and causes additional social costs to society. Specifically, ignoring racism as an important policy variable leaves federal, state, and local policies vulnerable to be misused as a tool to oppress and disenfranchise historically oppressed groups.

The failure to recognize the role of race and racial bias as a key policy variable through which the United States arrived at the state of mass incarceration, as well as the role that race plays in criminal justice system outcomes in general, will only reproduce historically racially biased social structures, racial disparities in the criminal justice system, and social exclusion, regardless of any reforms we choose to implement. 32 The impact of these racial disparities on earnings is telling. 33 But the collateral consequences of mass incarceration policies are far reaching and have been devastating to the black community. These consequences include greater health disparities, the destruction of the black family, greater obstacles to employment and human capital investment, and the forfeiture of citizenship status and political exclusion through felon disenfranchisement laws. 34

Recent research on the consequences of racial bias in U.S. incarceration rates makes manifest many of these connections. University of California, Berkeley public policy professors Rucker Johnson and Steven Raphael observe that male incarceration explains the bulk of the difference in HIV/AIDS rates between black and white women. 35 And I and my co-author Sally Wallace, an economist at Georgia State University’s Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, find that the financial shock of an incarceration raises the likelihood that households with children will become food insecure. 36 In fact, it is estimated that families with an incarcerated loved one incur almost $14,000 in debt, paying for court-related costs and fines, and that 1 in 3 families go into debt to maintain contact with an incarcerated family member. 37

Action at the federal level is now required to undo the harm caused by racially biased mass incarceration policies. To begin addressing these concerns, the federal government should first seek to re-educate the public about the history of race in the United States in order to break flawed perceptions in the association between race and crime. The first step in this strategy would be reconciliation and atonement, which may include reparations for past and current oppressive policies enacted against historically marginalized groups in general and African Americans in particular.

As part of this strategy, the government should allocate funding to state and local governments for initiatives that will educate the public on the history of race in the United States and how this history affects social outcomes and our beliefs about others. This should be incorporated throughout Kindergarten through grade 12 public school curriculums in all subjects.

Moreover, the federal government should encourage and promote policies that work against the dehumanizing effect of racial biases by providing incentives for the development of programs that produce empathy toward others. 38 As part of this strategy, these policies should address racial biases in the criminal justice system and their root causes, such as racial biases that persist in news media reports of criminals and victims. Research finds that the news media portray false accounts about the racial distribution of criminals, victims, and arbitrators of justice, and that these characterizations perpetuate false racial stereotypes about crime. 39 To the extent that these racial stereotypes impede the execution of unbiased criminal justice policy, racial biases in the media should be addressed. 40

The federal government also should conduct an audit of federal crime-control programs and policies (such as plea bargaining) to understand their impact on historically marginalized groups, encourage state and local governments to do the same, and then defund programs that inadvertently lead to greater net social harm, that increase racial disparities, or that have a disproportionate burden on historically marginalized communities. Such a benefit-cost analysis should be undertaken to determine how these policies not only influence crime but also their external costs (or benefits) to society. Policymakers can no longer condone partial equilibrium analyses that only consider the direct crime-fighting benefits of a program without also considering all of its direct and indirect costs to society, which includes determining the extent to which a policy is race neutral and its effect on marginalized groups.

These sets of recommendations would require unbiased data collection by the states and local governments of quality criminal justice data in order to understand why there are persistent racial disparities in the criminal justice system, including documentation not only for policing but also for prosecution, since prosecutors also are important gatekeepers to the criminal justice system. 41 This effort also would require better data collection on arrests, convictions, and incarcerations in national datasets, such as the U.S. Census, in order to improve population estimates of the impact of incarceration on individuals, families, and communities.

Theoretically, crime-control policies include programs that promote economic justice and the elimination of racial disparities. Yet investments in economic opportunities should be done on the front end through social services organizations, not on the back end through the criminal justice sector, which may only serve to increase the contact of young minorities with the criminal justice system. In other words, federal and state governments should stop using the criminal justice system to address economic inequities. This would require decreasing the correctional population, both juvenile and adult, which could be done, for example, by placing a moratorium on incarceration for non-violent offenses and redirecting the cost savings to social programs. The federal government could provide monetary incentives to states that reduce their correctional population. These social programs should not be administered by law enforcement agencies. Examples of these programs are early childhood education, subsidized childcare programs, summer programs for youth, improving K–12 school quality, and more equitable healthcare—all targeted toward the most marginalized groups in society.

Finally, the federal government should tie federal funding for criminal justice programs to states’ eradication of felon disenfranchisement laws. Although African Americans’ right to vote became protected by law with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, the racial disparities in felony convictions suggest that they disproportionately bear the burden of felon disenfranchisement laws, and through these laws, many have effectively lost their right to vote. 42 Most states prohibit individuals in prison or on probation or parole from voting, and although numerous states have developed protocols for restoring voting privileges to ex-offenders, these procedures are so burdensome that many of them do not seek to restore their rights. 43

Failure to address racial biases in our society risks democracy for all Americans. Failure to address the systematic racial biases in state, local, and federal policies in general, and the criminal justice system in particular, will only lead to the perpetuation of racial inequality and the overrepresentation of marginalized groups within sectors of social exclusion, especially the criminal justice system. While there is undoubtedly a behavioral aspect to crime, too much focus on the individual will not address the root causes of crime in our society or the structural barriers that have led to the social exclusion of historically marginalized individuals and communities.

— Robynn Cox is an assistant professor at the University of Southern California Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work.

Back to Vision 2020 full essay list .

1. Danielle Kaeble and Mary Cowhig, “Correctional populations in the United States” (Washington: U.S. Department of Justice, 2016), available at https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cpus16.pdf .

2. Steven Raphael and Michael Stoll, Why are so many Americans in prison? (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2013), available at https://www.russellsage.org/publications/why-are-so-many-americans-prison .

3. This number does not account for individuals who show up in the system more than one time.

4. Sarah K.S. Shannon and others, “The Growth, Scope, and Spatial Distribution of People With Felony Records in the United States, 1948–2019,” Demography 54 (1) (2017): 795–1818, available at http://users.soc.umn.edu/~uggen/Shannon_Uggen_DEM_2017.pdf .

5. Elizabeth Hinton, From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016), available at https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674979826 .

6. Robynn J. Cox, “Where do we go from here: Mass incarceration and the struggle for civil rights” (Washington: Economic Policy Institute, 2015), available at https://www.epi.org/publication/where-do-we-go-from-here-mass-incarceration-and-the-struggle-for-civil-rights/ ; Hinton, From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime .

7. Ibid., p. 334.

8. For a discussion, see Cox, “Where do we go from here: Mass incarceration and the struggle for civil rights.”

9. “There are no expenses, and no taxes are required, for negroes to share lunch counters, libraries, parks, hotels, and other facilities with whites.” Martin Luther King Jr., Where do we go from here: Chaos or community? (1968), p. 197.

10. Ibid, p.43.

11. Sean F. Reardon and Ann Owens, “60 Years after Brown: Trends and Consequences of School Desegregation,” Annual Review of Sociology (2014), available at https://cepa.stanford.edu/content/60-years-after-brown-trends-and-consequences-school-segregation .

12. Bradley B. Hardy, Trevon D. Logan, and John Parman, “The Historical Role of Race and Policy for Regional Inequality” (Washington: The Hamilton Project, 2018), pp. 43–69, available at https://www.hamiltonproject.org/papers/the_historical_role_of_race_and_policy_for_regional_inequality .

13. Dionissi Aliprantis and Daniel R. Carroll, “What is Behind the Persistence of the Racial Wealth Gap,” (Cleveland, OH: Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, 2019), available at https://www.clevelandfed.org/newsroom-and-events/publications/economic-commentary/2019-economic-commentaries/ec-201903-what-is-behind-the-persistence-of-the-racial-wealth-gap.aspx .

14. T.P Bonczar, “Prevalence of Imprisonment in the US Population, 1974-2001” (Washington: U.S. Department of Justice, 2003), pp. 81–83, available at https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/piusp01.pdf .

15. Jon Hurwitz and Mark Peffley, “Playing the Race Card in the Post-Willie Horton Era: The Impact of Racialized Code Words on Support for Punitive Crime Policy,” Public Opinion Quarterly 69 (1) (2005): 99–112, available at https://academic.oup.com/poq/article-abstract/69/1/99/1911587?redirectedFrom=fulltext .

16. Stephen Steinberg, “The liberal retreat from race during the post-civil rights era.” In W. Lubiano, ed., The house that race built: Original essays (New York: Random House, 1998), pp. 13–48, available at https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/32723585?q&versionId=39927489 ; Angela Y. Davis, “Black Americans and the punishment industry.” In W. Lubiano, ed., The house that race built: Original essays , pp. 264–279, available at https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/32723585?q&versionId=39927489 ; Steven Jay Gould, The mismeasure of man . (New York: WW Norton & Company, 1996).

17. Gould, The mismeasure of man .

18. Terrence D. Keel, “Religion, polygenism and the early science of human origins,” History of the Human Sciences 26 (2) (2013): 3–32, available at https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695113482916 .

19. Elizabeth Hinton, “A War within Our Own Boundaries: Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and the Rise of the Carceral State,” The Journal of American History 102 (1) (2015): 100–112; Hinton, From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime .

21. Jefferson E. Holcomb and others, “Civil asset forfeiture laws and equitable sharing activity by the police,” Criminology & Public Policy 17 (1) (2018): 101–127, available at https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12341 ; Kathleen R Sandy, “The discrimination inherent in America’s drug war: Hidden racism revealed by examining the hysteria over crack,” The Alabama Law Review 54 (2003): 665–694; Bruce L. Benson and David W. Rasmussen, “Predatory public finance and the origins of the war on drugs 1984–1989,” The Independent Review 1 (2) (1996): 163–18; J.H. Tieger, “Police discretion and discriminatory enforcement,” Duke Law Journal (4) (1971): 717–743; K. Russell, “Driving while black: Corollary phenomena and collateral consequences,” Boston College Law Review 40 (1998): 717.

22. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “War on Drugs: Federal Assistance to State and Local Drug Enforcement,” (1993), p. 2.

23. T. Dunworth, P. Haynes, and A.J. Saiger, “National assessment of the Byrne formula grant program” (Washington: U.S. Department of Justice, 1997), vol. 1.

24. Tim Carman and Steve McVicker, “Drug Money,” Houston Press, September 6, 2001, available at https://www.houstonpress.com/news/drug-money-6560746 .

25. Kelly v. Paschall , Texas Civ. 02-A-02-CA-702 JN (ACLU, 2003), available at http://www.aclu.org/FilesPDFs/2nd%20amended%20complaint%20in%20kelly%20v%20paschall.pdf .

26. Dunworth, Haynes, and Saiger, “National assessment of the Byrne formula grant program.”

27. Robynn Cox and Sally Wallace, “Identifying the link between food security and incarceration,” Southern Economic Journal 82 (4) (2016): 1062–1077, available at https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12080 .

28. Katherine Beckett, Kris Nyrop, and Lori Pfingst, “Race, drugs, and policing: Understanding disparities in drug delivery arrests,” Criminology 44 (1) (2006): 105–137. Nyrop currently is a consultant for the Public Defenders Association; Pfingst is chief of programs and policy in the Community Services Division of Washington state’s Department of Social and Health Services.

29. Derek Neal and Armin Rick, “The Prison Boom and the Lack of Black Progress After Smith and Welch.” Working Paper No. w20283 (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2014). They do not discuss the reasons for the racial bias in arrest rates, and instead take them as a given.

30. Emily K. Weisburst, “Patrolling Public Schools: The Impact of Funding for School Police on Student Discipline and Long‐term Education Outcomes,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 38 (2) (2019): 338–365.

31. Michelle Alexander, The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness (New York: The New Press, 2010); Cox, “Where do we go from here: Mass incarceration and the struggle for civil rights”; Hinton, From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime .

32. As Angela Davis wrote: “When the structural character of racism is ignored in discussions about crime and the rising population of incarcerated people, the racial imbalance in jails and prisons is treated as a contingency, at best as a product of the ‘culture of poverty,’ and at worst as proof of an assumed black monopoly on criminality. The high proportion of black people in the criminal justice system is thus normalized and neither the state nor the general public is required to talk about and act on the meaning of that racial imbalance.” See Davis, “Black Americans and the punishment industry,” p.265.

33. B. Western and B. Pettit, “Black-white wage inequality, employment rates, and incarceration,” American Journal of Sociology 111 (2) (2005): 553–578, available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/432780 ; Neal and Rick, “The Prison Boom and the Lack of Black Progress After Smith and Welch”; Byron L. Sykes and Michelle Maroto, “A Wealth of Inequalities: Mass Incarceration, Employment, and Racial Disparities in U.S. Household Wealth,” The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of Social Sciences 2 (6) (2016) 129–152, available at https://www.rsfjournal.org/content/2/6/129.abstract .

34. Western and Pettit, “Black-white wage inequality, employment rates, and incarceration”; H.J. Holzer, P. Offner, and E. Sorensen, “Declining employment among young black less-educated men: The role of incarceration and child support,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 24 (2) (2005): 329–250, available at https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20092 ; H. Holzer, S. Raphael, and M. Stoll, “Perceived criminality, criminal background checks, and the racial hiring practices of employers,” Journal of Law and Economics 49 (2006): 451–480, available at https://doi.org/10.1086/501089 ; H.J. Holzer, S. Raphael, and M.A. Stoll, “How Willing are Employers to Hire Ex-Offenders?” Focus 23 (2) (2004): 40–43; B. Western and B. Pettit, “Incarceration and racial inequality in men’s employment,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 54 (1) (2000): 3–16, available at https://doi.org/10.1177/001979390005400101 ; K.K. Charles and M.C. Luoh, “Male incarceration, the marriage market, and female outcomes,” The Review of Economics and Statistics 92 (3) (2010): 614–627, available at https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00022 ; D. Pager, B. Western, and N. Suggie, “Sequencing disadvantage: Barriers to employment facing young black and white men with criminal records,” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 623 (2009): 195–213, available at https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716208330793 ; L.M. Lopoo and B. Western, “Incarceration and the formation and stability of marital unions,” Journal of Marriage and Family 67 (3) (2005): 721–734, available at https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00165.x ; B. Western and C. Wildeman, “Punishment, inequality, and the future of mass incarceration,” University of Kansas Law Review 57 (2008): 851, available at https://doi.org/10.17161/1808.20098 ; C. Uggen, J. Manza, and M. Thompson, “Citizenship, democracy, and the civic reintegration of criminal offenders,” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences 605 (2006): 281–310, available at https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716206286898 ; H. Lee and C. Wildeman, “Things fall apart: Health consequences of mass imprisonment for African American women,” The Review of Black Political Economy (2011): 1–14, available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s12114-011-9112-4 ; R.J. Cox, “The impact of mass incarceration on the lives of African American women,” The Review of Black Political Economy 39 (2) (2012): 203–212, available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s12114-011-9114-2 ; Cox and Wallace, “Identifying the link between food security and incarceration.”

35. R.C. Johnson and S. Raphael, “The effects of male incarceration dynamics on acquired immune deficiency syndrome infection rates among African American women and men,” Journal of Law and Economics 52 (2) (2009): 251–293, available at https://doi.org/10.1086/597102 .

36. Cox and Wallace, “Identifying the link between food security and incarceration.”

37. S. deVuono-Powell and others, “Who Pays? The True Cost of Incar¬ceration on Families” (Oakland, CA: Ella Baker Center, 2015).

38. Robynn Cox, “Applying the Theory of Social Good to Mass Incarceration and Civil Rights,” Research on Social Work Practice , September 26, 2019, available at https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1049731519872838 .

39. F.D. Gilliam Jr and others, “Crime in black and white: The violent, scary world of local news,” Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics 1 (3) (1996): 6–23.

40. F.D. Gilliam Jr. and S. Iyengar, “Prime suspects: The influence of local television news on the viewing public,” American Journal of Political Science (2000): 560–573.

41. M.M. Rehavi and S.B. Starr, “Racial disparity in federal criminal sentences,” Journal of Political Economy 122 (6) (2014): 1320–1354.

42. So extensive is the incarceration and felony conviction crisis that it is estimated that had it not been for felon disenfranchisement laws, former Vice President and Democratic Party presidential candidate Al Gore would have won Florida by, at the minimum, approximately 31,000 votes and thus the presidency in the 2000 presidential election. See C. Uggen and J. Manza, “Democratic contraction? Political consequences of felon disenfranchisement in the United States,” American Sociological Review (2002): 777–803; P. Karlan, “Forum.” In G.C. Loury, ed., Race, Incarceration, and American Values (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2008), pp. 41–56; Uggen, Manza, and Thompson, “Citizenship, democracy, and the civic reintegration of criminal offenders.” More than just its impact on presidential elections, disproportionate felony convictions within the black and other excluded communities could also lead to a lack of political representation for these groups, which may make it more likely that unfavorable laws affecting these marginalized groups are passed.

43. The Sentencing Project, “Felony disenfranchisement laws in the United States” (2013), available at http://www.sentencingproject.org/detail/publication.cfm?publication_id=15 .

U.S. school segregation in the 21st century

October 15, 2019

What upticks in U.S. economic inequality and incarceration mean for marriage

October 23, 2018

Why we need better re-employment policies for formerly incarcerated African American men

February 29, 2016

Measuring population estimates of housing insecurity in the United States: A comprehensive approach

December 19, 2017

Discriminatory penalties at the intersection of race and gender in the United States

August 7, 2018

Are today’s inequalities limiting tomorrow’s opportunities?

October 3, 2018

Explore the Equitable Growth network of experts around the country and get answers to today's most pressing questions!

Reducing Racial Inequality in Crime and Justice: Science, Practice, and Policy (2023)

Chapter: front matter.

Consensus Study Report

NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

This activity was supported by contracts between the National Academy of Sciences and Arnold Ventures (20-05123), Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation No. INV-025407, The Joyce Foundation (SG-20-43354), National Academy of Sciences Cecil and Ida Green Fund, National Academy of Sciences W.K. Kellogg Fund, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (78590), Russell Sage Foundation (2010-28361), and William T. Grant Foundation (201726). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-69337-0 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309- 69337-3 Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26705 Library of Congress Control Number: 2023930738

This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu .

Copyright 2023 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2023. Reducing Racial Inequality in Crime and Justice: Science, Practice, and Policy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26705 .

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org .

Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.

Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.

Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.

For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo .

COMMITTEE ON REDUCING RACIAL INEQUALTIES IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

KHALIL GIBRAN MUHAMMAD ( Co-Chair ), Harvard Kennedy School

BRUCE WESTERN ( Co-Chair ), Columbia University

DARYL ATKINSON, Forward Justice

ROBERT D. CRUTCHFIELD, University of Washington

RONALD L. DAVIS, 21CP Solutions, LLC (committee member through 9/22/2021)

HONORABLE BERNICE DONALD, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

FRANCIS (FRANKIE) GUZMAN, National Center for Youth Law

ELIZABETH HINTON, Yale University

NIKKI JONES, University of California, Berkeley

TRACEY MEARES, Yale University

DEREK A. NEAL, University of Chicago

STEVEN RAPHAEL, University of California, Berkeley

NANCY RODRIGUEZ, University of California, Irvine

ADDIE C. ROLNICK, University of Nevada, Las Vegas

ROBERT J. SAMPSON, Harvard University

JEFFREY SEDGWICK, Justice Research and Statistics Association

MARÍA B. VÉLEZ, University of Maryland

Study Staff

YAMROT NEGUSSIE, Study Director

ELLIE GRIMES, Research Associate

DARA SHEFSKA, Communications Specialist (through March 2022)

AARON WARNICK, Communications Specialist (from June 2022)

STACEY SMIT, Program Coordinator

EMILY P. BACKES, Deputy Board Director

NATACHA BLAIN, Senior Board Director

COMMITTEE ON LAW AND JUSTICE

ROBERT D. CRUTCHFIELD ( Chair ), University of Washington ( retired )

SALLY S. SIMPSON ( Vice Chair ), University of Maryland

ROD K. BRUNSON, University of Maryland

SHAWN D. BUSHWAY, University at Albany

PREETI CHAUHAN, John Jay College of Criminal Justice

KIMBERLÉ W. CRENSHAW, University of California, Los Angeles

MARK S. JOHNSON, Howard University

CYNTHIA LUM, George Mason University

JOHN M. MacDONALD, University of Pennsylvania

KAREN J. MATHIS, American Bar Association ( retired ), University of Denver

THEODORE A. McKEE, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia

SAMUEL L. MYERS, JR., University of Minnesota

EMILY OWENS, University of California, Irvine

CYNTHIA RUDIN, Duke University

WILLIAM J. SABOL, Georgia State University

LINDA A. TEPLIN, Northwestern University Medical School

YAMROT NEGUSSIE, Senior Program Officer

Acknowledgments

This report would not have been possible without the contributions of many people. First, we thank the sponsors of this study: Arnold Ventures, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, The Joyce Foundation, National Academy of Sciences Cecil and Ida Green Fund, National Academy of Sciences W.K. Kellogg Fund, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Russell Sage Foundation, and William T. Grant Foundation.

Special thanks go to the members of the study committee, who dedicated extensive time, thought, and energy to the project on a compressed timeline under unprecedented conditions during the coronavirus pandemic.

In addition to conducting systematic literature reviews and drawing from its own research and expertise, the committee received input from several outside sources, whose willingness to share their perspectives and experience was essential to the committee’s work. The committee began its work with a series of public information-gathering sessions, where committee members engaged with a diverse set of researchers, practitioners, and representatives directly impacted by the criminal justice system. 1 The committee and project staff thank the many speakers and discussants who provided research, data, and testimony to inform the committee’s study process.

The committee and project staff also thank the group of stakeholders and officials who shared their practiced-based expertise: Nicole Banister (National Governors Association), Edwin Bell (National Center

___________________

1 For more information on the committee’s public information-gathering sessions, including agendas and video recordings, see https://www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/reducing-racial-inequalities-in-the-criminal-justice-system

for State Courts), Michael Buenger (National Center for State Courts), Jae K. Davenport (Virginia Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security), Amanda Essex (National Conference of State Legislatures), Elizabeth Glazer ([ former ] Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice, New York), Kalyn Hill ([ former ] National Governors Association), David Hureau (University at Albany), Jacquelyn Katuin (Virginia Secretary of Public Safety and Homeland Security), Alison Lawrence (National Conference of State Legislatures), Jeffrey Locke (National Governors Association), Brett Mattson (National Association of Counties), Karhlton Moore (Ohio Office of Criminal Justice Services), Anne Teigen (National Conference of State Legislatures), and Andy Wilson (Office of Governor Mike DeWine, OH).

To inform its report, the committee built on a synthesis of research on the social drivers of racial disparities in policing. The committee would like to thank Roland Neil (University of Pennsylvania) for contributing this valuable resource to the committee’s process.

The committee also elicited input from “listening sessions” where perspectives were shared regarding direct work with barriers and innovative solutions to reducing racial inequalities in the criminal justice system. The committee thanks the following individuals: Donald Anthonyson (Families for Freedom), Shelby Chestnut (Transgender Law Center), Currey Cook (Lambda Legal), Christina Gilbert (National Juvenile Defender Center), Annita Lucchesi (Sovereign Bodies Institute), Amber Miller (Yurok Tribal Court), Ravi Ragbir (New Sanctuary Coalition), Paromita Shah (Just Futures Law), Sirine Shebaya (National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild), Jane Shim (Immigrant Defense Project) and, Toni-Michelle Williams (Solutions Not Punishment Collaborative).

This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Amanda Y. Agan (Department of Economics and Program in Criminal Justice, Rutgers University), Phillip Atiba Goff (Department of African American Studies and Center for Policing Equity, Yale University), John M. MacDonald (Department of Criminology, University of Pennsylvania), Theodore A. McKee (United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Philadelphia, PA), Daniel S. Nagin (H.J. Heinz School of Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University), Victor M. Ríos (Department of Sociology, University of California, Santa Barbara), Cassia Spohn (School

of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona State University), Heather A. Thompson (Departments of Afro-American and African Studies and Department of History, University of Michigan), and Jeffery T. Ulmer (Criminal Justice Research Center, Pennsylvania State University).

Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Bradford H. Gray (Urban Institute) and Anne Morrison Piehl (Rutgers University). They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.

The committee members were fortunate to have the additional research support from staff in their respective institutions and provide thanks to the following individuals: Teresita Cruz Vital (University of California, Berkeley), Madison Dawkins (The Square One Project), Evie Lopoo (The Square One Project), Toryn Sperry (University of Maryland, College Park), and Caroline J. Zhai Lefever (Yale Law School).

The committee also wishes to extend its gratitude to the staff of the National Academies, in particular to Yamrot Negussie for her expert direction of this study from beginning to end as well as Emily Backes who made critical substantive contributions in the conception, writing, and editing of the report. Ellie Grimes provided essential coordination and research alongside writing support throughout the consensus study process. Stacey Smit provided key administrative and logistical support and ensured the committee process ran efficiently and smoothly. Throughout the project, Natacha Blain, director of the Committee on Law and Justice, provided oversight. From the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, we thank Kirsten Sampson-Snyder, Douglas Sprunger, and Ron Warnick who shepherded the report through the review process and assisted with its communication and dissemination. Thanks are also due to Dara Shefska for her skilled contributions to the communications of the report and to Abigail Allen and Briana Smith for their fact-checking assistance. We also thank Marc DeFrancis for his skillful editing and Christopher Lao-Scott for providing research and fact-checking assistance.

Khalil Gibran Muhammad, Co-Chair Bruce Western, Co-Chair Yamrot Negussie, Study Director Committee on Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System

This page intentionally left blank.

Acronyms and Abbreviations

1 Introduction

THE COMMITTEE’S CHARGE

STUDY APPROACH

COMMITTEE METHODOLOGY

KEY TERMS AND CONCEPTS

Racial Disparities and Inequality in Criminal Justice

Structural Racism

HISTORICAL ROOTS OF RACIAL INEQUALITY IN CRIME AND JUSTICE

Colonial and Antebellum America

The Civil War and Its Aftermath

The Progressive Era to World War II

THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE 21ST CENTURY

ADDRESSING RACIAL INEQUALITIES THROUGH PUBLIC POLICY

REPORT ORGANIZATION

2 Racial Disparities in Victimization, Offending, and Involvement with the Criminal Justice System

VICTIMIZATION

Property and Nonlethal Violent Crimes

Homicide Victimization

DIFFERENCES IN ARRESTS AND CRIMINAL OFFENDING

Patterns of Offending by Race

INTERACTIONS WITH POLICE OFFICERS

Basic Patterns Regarding Stops, Searches, and Search Outcomes

Hit-Rate Analyses of Stops Involving Searches

Uses of Force and Police-Involved Shootings

Nature of Interactions between Police and the Public

EVIDENCE CONCERNING PUBLIC SAFETY DELIVERY

PRETRIAL DETENTION

PLEA BARGAINING, TRIALS, AND SENTENCING

SENTENCING AND CORRECTIONAL TRENDS

COMMUNITY SUPERVISION

SYNTHESIZING THE EVIDENCE

CHAPTER 2 APPENDIX FIGURES

3 Social Drivers of Racial Inequalities in Crime and Justice

HISTORICAL LEGACIES

CONTEMPORARY RACIAL INEQUALITIES

CONCENTRATED DISADVANTAGE AND VIOLENCE

Concentrated Disadvantage and Gun Violence: A Closer Look at Trends

COMPOUNDED ADVERSITIES AND SOCIAL MECHANISMS

MODELING RACIAL GAPS IN CRIME

RESEARCH GAPS

4 Criminal Justice Drivers of Racial Inequalities

CONCEPTUALIZING RACIAL INEQUALITY

The Explained versus Unexplained Racial Differences Framework

Criminalization

THE FORMS AND EXPANSION OF RACIAL CRIMINALIZATION

CRIMINAL JUSTICE CONTACT AS CUMULATIVE DISADVANTAGE

Early Exposure to the Criminal Justice System

Racial Differences in Police Contacts

Neighborhood Context

Stops and Arrests

Pretrial Decision Making and Charging

Pretrial Release and Detention

Sentencing and Incarceration

Conditions of Imprisonment

The Consequences of Conviction and Incarceration

Probation, Parole, and Supervision

Legal Financial Obligations

5 Introduction to Part II

GUIDING PRINCIPLES TO REDUCE RACIAL INEQUALITY IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

Reckoning and Reconciliation

Participation, Accountability, and Transparency

Impacted Community Voices

Heterogeneity

APPLYING A HISTORICAL LENS TO INFORM CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS

6 Community-Driven Safety and Reducing Harm

DEFINING COMMUNITY AND COMMUNITY WELL-BEING

COLLECTIVE EFFICACY AND NEIGHBORHOOD SOCIAL ORGANIZATION

What Is Needed for Success

COMMUNITY-DRIVEN INITIATIVES

Community-Centered Approaches to Justice

Community-Driven Accountability Efforts

Community-Based Anti-Violence Efforts

Community-Driven Responses to Intimate Partner Violence

Community-Led Crisis Response Efforts

Community-Led Efforts to Mitigate System Harm

EXPANDING THE EVIDENCE BASE

Measuring Community Social Organization and Views on Safety

7 Non-Criminal Policy Approaches to Reduce Racial Inequalities in Crime and Justice

IMPROVING THE MATERIAL WELL-BEING OF COMMUNITIES

Policies and Programs to Address Underinvestment

Place-Based Approaches

Labor Market Solutions

PUBLIC HEALTH APPROACHES TO VIOLENCE

Firearm Violence and Related Policies

Reducing Harmful Environmental Exposures

Alcohol Outlets and Community Violence

INTERVENTIONS IN OTHER SYSTEMS

Strengthening Families and Protecting Children

Enhancing Opportunities for Youth Learning and Development

Promoting Health and Well-being

8 Criminal Justice System Reforms to Reduce Racial Inequality

INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE AND POLICY

Constitutional Sources of Parsimony

Assessing Decisions and Costs across Levels of Government

Shifting Policy Approaches to Drugs and Violent Crime

Changing the Context of Policing through Oversight and Accountability

Changing the Disposition of Officers

Racial Inequality and Police Deterrence Tactics

Pretrial Release Decisions and Risk Assessment

Fines and Fees Mitigation

Modification of Judicial and Prosecutorial Discretion

SENTENCING AND CORRECTIONS

Reducing Prison Admissions

Reducing Long Sentences

Repealing the Death Penalty

9 The Federal Role

HISTORY OF FEDERAL GRANT MAKING FOR CRIME AND PUBLIC SAFETY

CURRENT GRANT PROGRAMS

Office of Justice Programs

Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Program

Other Bureau of Justice Assistance Grant Programs

Programs Supporting Juvenile Justice, Crime Victims, and Sex Offense Enforcement

Separate Offices Administering Public Safety Grants

Formula-Funding and Categorical Grants-in-Aid

ENHANCING THE FEDERAL SYSTEM TO ADDRESS RACIAL INEQUALITY IN THE SYSTEM

Barriers to Funding

Further Implications of These Barriers

Opportunities

Illustrative Example: The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

10 Data and Research Opportunities

BUILDING A ROBUST CRIMINAL JUSTICE DATA INFRASTRUCTURE

Integration of Data Systems and Cross-System Linkages

Consistent Reporting of Racial and Ethnic Data

Incentives for Improving Data Quality and Transparency

AN AGENDA FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Appendix: Biosketches of Committee Members and Staff

Boxes, Figures, and Tables

S-1 Key Terms and Definitions

S-2 Guiding Principles to Reduce Racial Inequality in the Criminal Justice System

1-1 Statement of Task

1-2 Perspectives from Public Information-Gathering Sessions

1-3 Key Terms and Concepts

1-4 The Psychological Science of Bias

3-1 Gun Violence: Different Types and Recent Trends

4-1 Indigenous People and Criminal Jurisdiction

4-2 Sentencing in Federal Court

4-3 Protecting Ties between Incarcerated Parents and Their Children

5-1 Case Study: Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Offenses and Control Act of 1961

6-1 Community-Driven Response: Mutual Aid Programs

6-2 Credible Messengers

7-1 “Greening” Cities: Pennsylvania Horticultural Society (PHS) LandCare Program

7-2 “Ban the Box” Policies: Unintended Consequences

7-3 Transitions Clinic Network

8-1 Focused Deterrence in Boston: Operation Ceasefire

9-1 Allocation of Federal Responsibilities: Human Trafficking

2-1 Distribution of all U.S. residents across census tracks classified by the proportion of residents who are poor, by race and ethnicity, during the 2015–2019 period

2-2 Rate of homicide offenses by population, 1990–2020

2-3 Scatter plot of 2020 murder rates against 2019 murder rates for cities with more than 100,000 residents in the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI’s) Quarterly Crime Report data

2-4 Trends in arrest rates by race for index violent offense, property offense, non-index crimes, and juvenile arrests, 1980–2020

2-5 Scatter plot of police stops per 100 residents for Black and Hispanic residents against White stops for U.S. cities included in the Stanford Open Policing Project database

2-6 Scatter plot of police stops per 100 residents for Black and Hispanic residents against White searches for state police departments included in the Stanford Open Policing Project database

2-7 Scatter plots of contraband discovery rates, Black and Hispanic rates against White rates for California agencies

2-8 Scatter plots of Black contraband discovery rates against White discovery rates for specific contraband categories

2-9 Scatter plots of Hispanic contraband discovery rates against White discovery rates for specific contraband categories

2-10 Clearance rates by race/ethnicity for all murders occurring between 2000 and 2019

2-11 Number of state and federal prisoners per 100,000 residents by race and ethnicity, 1990 through 2018

2-12 Long-term trends in U.S. and California incarceration rates, 1980–2020

2-13 Long-term violent and property crime trends in California, 1970–2020

2A-1 Difference in the proportion of serious violent incidents reported to the police by the race/ethnicity of the offender relative to incidents involving White offenders: all offenses 2012 through 2019 for all serious and specific offense types

2A-2 Difference in the proportion of serious violent incidents reported to the police by the race/ethnicity of the offender relative to incidents involving White offenders: raw difference, adjusting for victim Race/ethnicity, and adjusting for offense type

2A-3 Proportion of stops for equipment and non-moving violations by agency type, race, and gender, California

2A-4 Incidence of actions taken by officers during traffic stops by agency type, race, and gender, California

2A-5 Traffic stop outcomes by agency type, race, and gender, California

8-1 Felony arrests per 100,000 by race and single year of age for 12 months before and 12 months after the passage of Prop 47

2-1 Property Crime Victimizations per 1,000 Households by Race/Ethnicity of the Household Head, All Offenses Occurring 2012 through 2019

2-2 Serious Violent Crime Victimizations per 1,000 by Race/Ethnicity, All Offenses Occurring 2012 through 2019

2-3 Homicide Rates for Males and Females, by Race (Age-Adjusted), 1990, 2000, 2010, 2015

2-4 Homicides per 100,000 by Race, Gender, and Hispanic Origin, 2019 and 2020 for Select States

2-5 Distribution of Serious Violent Criminal Victimizations across Race/Ethnicity of the Offender as Perceived by the Crime Victim, 2012 through 2019

2-6 Distribution of Criminal Offenses across Offender Race/Ethnicity by Race/Ethnicity of the Victim and Offense Type, 2012 through 2019

2-7 Race/Ethnicity-Specific Distribution of Murder Victims by the Race/Ethnicity of the Offender for Murders Where Offender Race/Ethnicity Is Known (All Murders Occurring from 2000 to 2019)

2-8 Persons Killed by Police per 100,000, by Region and Race/Ethnicity, 2015–2021

2-9 Proportion of Property Crime Incidents Reported to the Police by the Race/Ethnicity of the Household Head and the Offense Type (All Offenses Occurring between 2012 and 2019)

2-10 Proportion of Serious Violent Crime Incidents Reported to the Police by the Race/Ethnicity of the Victim and the Offense Type (All Offenses Occurring between 2012 and 2019)

2-11 Parole Populations by Race/Ethnicity, 2001 through 2019

2-12 Proportion Institutionalized for California Men, 18 to 55 Years of Age, by Race/Ethnicity, Age, and Educational Attainment, 2011, 2014, 2017

2-13 Proportion Institutionalized among California Women, 18 to 55 Years of Age, by Race/Ethnicity, Age, and Educational Attainment, 2011, 2014, 2017

4-1-1 Criminal Jurisdiction for Indian and Non-Indian Defendants

4-1 Cumulative Risk Estimates of Criminal Justice Contact, by Race

8-1 State Prison Population by Race/Ethnicity and Offense, 2000, 2019

8-2 Numbers of Stops, Frisks, and Arrests in the Top 10 Precincts in 2011, When Floyd v. City of New York Decided That the New York Police Department Policy of Stop and Frisk Was Unconstitutional, and in 2014, by Race

The history of the U.S. criminal justice system is marked by racial inequality. Across time and space numerous racialized populations from the Indigenous tribes of North America to Central American immigrants at today’s southern U.S. border have been a focus of attention for the nation’s police, courts, and prisons. The most researched among these groups are African Americans, whose enslavement stood as a visible exception to the founding principles of universal liberty, liberal democracy, and natural rights. W.E.B. Du Bois’s (1899) study of Philadelphia’s Seventh Ward at the end of the 19th century was among the earliest studies to link high rates of crime and arrest in Black neighborhoods of the city with structural inequalities and discrimination. Thorsten Sellin (1928) documented the high rates of conviction and prison sentencing among Black defendants in the mid-1920s, and also traced the historic connections of chattel slavery to chain gangs and prison farms in the American South ( Sellin, 1976 ). The high rate of imprisonment among Black Americans has been well documented for the entire 20th century and into the 21st century. As we will see in the following chapters, today’s researchers—like Du Bois a century ago—trace disparate incarceration to conditions of crime, poverty, and segregation and a punitive policy response that flourished under such conditions. Racial disparity in incarceration was a major theme of an earlier National Research Council (NRC) report (NRC, 2014), and shortly before this committee first met, in 2020, the nation had experienced its largest racial justice protests in opposition to police brutality.

Since the 1990s, various members of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Committee on Law and Justice, which

oversaw this report, have made efforts to support a consensus study on racial inequality in the criminal justice system. While many of these efforts were unsuccessful, the 2014 publication of the NRC report on high rates of incarceration helped build the research case for a more targeted examination of race and racism. The committee was compelled by the urgent need to respond to the disproportionate numbers of police stops, court appearances, and prison and jail admissions among Black, Latino, and Native American people.

Earlier NRC reports had sometimes examined research on racial inequality in the criminal justice system, but they had concentrated on specific stages of criminal processing, and racial inequality was never the main focus. For example, a report in 1983 on sentencing policy made an important and detailed examination of research on racial discrimination in sentencing and incarceration. The report concluded that there was a large racial disparity in imprisonment, but “factors other than racial discrimination in sentencing account for most of the disproportionate representation of blacks in U.S. prisons” ( NRC, 1983 , p. 13). Another NRC report in 2004, on policing, found that the “class and gender of suspects” have little influence on police behavior, but “more research is needed on the complex interplay of race, ethnicity, and other social factors” (NRC, 2004b, p. 3). In 2018, a National Academies report was published on proactive policing, including a close examination of research on racial bias in hot spot and other proactive policing tactics. The 2018 report described the testimony of a community advocate who asked: “Why aren’t you doing anything to invest in the reasons why this is a hot spot in the first place?” (the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018, p. 274). The report went on to observe, “The choice of policing as a response to crime problems is in itself a policy decision that has implications for communities.” The charge to the proactive policing committee, however, was not broad enough to consider how policing functions within a broad social system of racial inequalities, inclusive of the criminal justice system, and the greater system’s impact on crime.

The current report should be understood to stand in this line of work by the National Academies on race and the criminal justice system, and as the most comprehensive effort to date. In this study, because of the pioneering efforts of Jeremy Travis and Ruth Peterson, racial inequality is the central focus of the statement of task, and the committee’s charge takes in the whole criminal justice system in relation to a broad consideration of societal factors. The criminal justice system does not operate in a vacuum and never has.

We are asked to review research to explain why there are such large racial inequalities in crime, victimization, and criminal justice involvement, and to offer evidence-based advice on reducing inequality. The topic

is vast and in places we have necessarily traded breadth for depth. In the committee’s perspective, the criminal justice system is a complex interlocking apparatus and part of the challenge of understanding racial inequality involves understanding the operation of the system as a whole. Large crime policy projects, like the War on Drugs and the War on Crime that were mounted in the 1960s and 1970s, involved thousands of agencies including state legislatures, police departments, prosecutors, and prison authorities. Racial inequality is not produced by any one stage of the system but is the combined product of each stage in the sequence.

In addition to institutional complexity, police, courts, and prisons are deeply embedded in a racially unequal society that has denied opportunity to communities of color (e.g., Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Native American communities) and preserved socio-economic advantages for White Americans. Through segregation, unequal public investment, and a political acceptance of enduring and spatially concentrated poverty, White Americans have mostly lived in vastly different social worlds than people of other racial groups. In Black, Latino, and Native American neighborhoods and communities where crime and poverty are more prevalent, the criminal justice system is the dominant response to crime. In White neighborhoods and communities, the public policy approach to safety does not depend chiefly on the threat of arrest and incarceration.

The committee has tried to absorb the lessons of research on racial inequalities in crime and the criminal justice system to propose policies that might reduce both. Criminal justice reform has a fundamentally important role to play in reducing racial inequality. Hundreds of policy initiatives are currently unfolding around the country that aim to reduce the burden of unnecessary or harmful state supervision in Black, Latino, and Native American communities, while also reducing crime. We have tried to learn from some of the most important of these examples in proposing future directions for policy. The committee also studied many of the efforts undertaken through community-led initiatives and social policies that try to build a different kind of safety and well-being that relies less on police and prisons. We have also tried to draw lessons from these examples, while acknowledging the political challenges. The committee acknowledges the importance of the inclusion of lived experience with the criminal justice system throughout this process, which we have integrated through committee perspective, our information-gathering process, and dissemination efforts (see below for artwork created for the report). Finally, we see a critical role for the federal government to seed new initiatives and help promote a paradigm shift that can change the relationship of citizens of color to the American state. Instead of depending mostly on punitive measures by the state to deliver safety, a United States without racial inequality would find safety in greater prospects of opportunity, healthier

communities in which to live, and accountability for harm would involve setting relationships right. In such a world, the criminal justice system might even be deserving of its name. We offer this report in the hope of such an outcome.

Khalil Gibran Muhammad, Co-Chair Bruce Western, Co-Chair Committee on Reducing Racial Inequalities in the Criminal Justice System

Title: Untold

Artist: Jemaell Riley

Artist statement:

I am unfortunate to be one of those cast away by society. The decade removed from my life are the pages of some untold story that most will never know and a story I never wish to relive. This is not unique—in this art is a picture of those lost pages, scattered, full of lives from every community, race, and creed who will struggle to find the meaning of being forgotten.

The history of the U.S. criminal justice system is marked by racial inequality and sustained by present day policy. Large racial and ethnic disparities exist across the several stages of criminal legal processing, including in arrests, pre-trial detention, and sentencing and incarceration, among others, with Black, Latino, and Native Americans experiencing worse outcomes. The historical legacy of racial exclusion and structural inequalities form the social context for racial inequalities in crime and criminal justice. Racial inequality can drive disparities in crime, victimization, and system involvement.

Reducing Racial Inequality in Crime and Justice: Science, Practice, and Policy synthesizes the evidence on community-based solutions, noncriminal policy interventions, and criminal justice reforms, charting a path toward the reduction of racial inequalities by minimizing harm in ways that also improve community safety. Reversing the effects of structural racism and severing the close connections between racial inequality, criminal harms such as violence, and criminal justice involvement will involve fostering local innovation and evaluation, and coordinating local initiatives with state and federal leadership.

This report also highlights the challenge of creating an accurate, national picture of racial inequality in crime and justice: there is a lack of consistent, reliable data, as well as data transparency and accountability. While the available data points toward trends that Black, Latino, and Native American individuals are overrepresented in the criminal justice system and given more severe punishments compared to White individuals, opportunities for improving research should be explored to better inform decision-making.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

• Faculty of Arts and Sciences
• FAS Theses and Dissertations
• Communities & Collections
• By Issue Date
• FAS Department
• Quick submit
• Waiver Generator
• DASH Stories
• Accessibility
• COVID-related Research

Terms of Use

• Privacy Policy
• By Collections
• By Departments

Essays on Criminal Justice Reform and Racial Inequality

Access Status

Citable link to this page, collections.

• FAS Theses and Dissertations [6136]

Contact administrator regarding this item (to report mistakes or request changes)

Mother's Day match! Your donation doubled through May 12. Donate today.

8 Facts You Should Know About Racial Injustice in the Criminal Legal System

Racial discrimination has been ingrained in the criminal legal system from its earliest days and persists today.

02.05.21 By Daniele Selby

Rodney Reed in Allan B. Polunsky Unit, West Livingston, Texas in 2015. (Image: Courtesy of Massoud Hayoun/ Al Jazeera)

Updated on Feb. 6, 2022: This piece has been updated to reflect recent statistics.

While Black History Month is a time to celebrate the progress that has been made and to honor those who fought for equal rights for Black people in the United States, it’s also an occasion to reflect on how far we have to go.

The legacy of slavery, racist Jim Crow laws, and hateful lynchings has translated into modern-day mass incarceration and the disproportionate imprisonment of Black people. No where is that seen more clearly than in prisons like the Mississippi State Penitentiary — also known as Parchman Farm —  and Louisiana’s Angola prison, which were built on and modeled after slave plantations and where several Innocence Project clients have been incarcerated.

Racial discrimination and bias has been ingrained in the criminal legal and law enforcement system from its earliest days and continues to pervade every level of the system today. The Innocence Project, with your support, is committed to addressing these injustices.

These eight statistics highlight the ways in which racial inequality persists in the criminal legal system today and contributes to wrongful conviction.

1. More than half of death row exonerees are Black.

Of the 185 people exonerated from death row since 1973, about 53% are Black, according to the Death Penalty Information Center . Historically the death penalty has been disproportionately applied to Black people in the U.S., and they are still overrepresented on death row. Today, the states that sentence the most people to death are those that once carried out the most lynchings .

Lynchings of Black Victims between 1883 and 1940 (left) and Executions of Black Defendants Between 1972 and 2020.

2. Nearly half the people currently on death row are Black

In 2020, about 42% of people on death row were Black including Innocence Project clients Rodney Reed and Pervis Payne , though Black people make up just 13% of the U.S. population overall.

The death penalty is more likely to be used in cases in which a white person is killed — people convicted of killing white people are executed at 17 times the rate of those convicted of killing Black people. Both Mr. Reed and Mr. Payne were convicted of killing white women in the South.

Since 1976 — when the death penalty was reinstated after a four-year suspension — nearly 300 Black people accused of murdering white people have been executed, compared to 21 white people accused of murdering Black people, according to the Death Penalty Information Center .

3. Half of the 2,947 people exonerated since 1989 are Black.

According to the National Registry of Exonerations, 1,471 Black people have been exonerated since 1989. While these people have since regained their freedom, collectively, more than 15,000 years of freedom were stolen from them.

How the 13th Amendment Kept Slavery Alive

4. innocent black people are seven times more likely to be wrongfully convicted of murder than innocent white people..

In particular, Black people are more likely to be wrongly convicted of murder when the victim is white. Among Black people exonerated from murder convictions, approximately 31% were wrongly convicted of killing white people, though just 15% of homicides by Black people involved white victims, the National Registry of Exonerations reported .

5. It takes longer to exonerate an innocent Black person.

Innocent Black people on death row spend an average of 13.8 years wrongly imprisoned before being exonerated — about 45% longer than innocent white people. This racial disparity in time spent wrongfully incarcerated holds true across different types of convictions.

Black people tend to receive harsher sentences when accused of sexual assault, and have a harder time being exonerated from a wrongful conviction. On average, they spend 4.5 more years in prison than their white counterparts before being exonerated.

Black people wrongly convicted of murder spend an average of three more years in prison than white people —  four if they are on death row. Innocent Black people spend an average of 16 years on death row before they are exonerated.

6. Police misconduct occurred in more than half of all wrongful murder conviction cases involving innocent Black people.

According to the National Registry of Exonerations , cases of Black people exonerated from wrongful murder convictions were 22% more likely to involve police misconduct than similar cases involving white defendants.

In Illinois, for example, under former Chicago Police Commander Jon Burge, police psychologically abused and physically tortured more than 100 Black men and women until many falsely confessed to crimes they did not commit. Several people wrongly convicted by Mr. Burge and his officers, including Innocence Project client Kevin Bailey , have since been exonerated.

Join Pervis Payneu2019s fight for justice

But racial discrimination can play a role in a wrongful conviction case before it even makes it into courtroom. Racial bias in everyday police encounters can often lead to wrongful conviction or even death.

7. About one-third of unarmed people killed by police are Black.

Of the more than 149 unarmed people killed by the police in 2017 , 49 were Black, according to Mapping Police Violence.

Despite thousands of police shootings since 2005, only 110 officers who shot a person while on duty have been charged with murder or manslaughter, FiveThirtyEight reported . And less than half of them were convicted . Too often officers who use excessive force or engage in misconduct return to their jobs without consequence. This lack of accountability can lead to wrongful convictions. 

Termaine Hicks was released from SCI Phoenix Prison on Dec. 16, 2020, in Collegeville, Penn. His brothers Tone Hicks and Tyron McClendon greeted him upon release. (Image: Jason E. Miczek/AP Images for the Innocence Project)

Philadelphia police shot our client Termaine Hicks in the back three times in 2001, assuming that he was attacking a woman he was actually helping. Officers then covered up their mistake and Mr. Hicks spent 19 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit, while the officers — who went on to be the subjects of numerous allegations of lying, planting evidence, excessive force, and substantiated complaints filed by civilians — returned to their jobs. At the Innocence Project, we are advocating for police disciplinary records, which are currently confidential in about half the states, to be made public to increase police transparency and accountability.

8. Black people are more likely to be stopped and searched.

Studies have shown that Black people, Latinx people, and communities of color are more likely to be stopped, searched, and suspected of a crime — even when no crime has occurred. Data shows that when Black drivers are stopped, they are more likely to be searched, but contraband is less likely to be found.

Racial bias in policing contributes to the wrongful incarceration and conviction of innocent Black people and is also seen in arrest quotas , the use of surveillance technologies like facial recognition software to identify suspects, predictive policing tools , and gang databases . Research also shows that strong unconscious racial biases associating Black people with criminality persist — in an investigation these biases could result in officers locking in on a suspect who conforms to the stereotypes and assumptions they hold, instead of conducting a comprehensive investigation into all potential suspects. This often becomes the first step toward wrongful conviction.

Leave a Reply

Thank you for visiting us. You can learn more about how we consider cases here . Please avoid sharing any personal information in the comments below and join us in making this a hate-speech free and safe space for everyone.

Martha Eberle February 9, 2022 at 8:15 pm Reply Reply   

What planet are you living on? Agree with Black Queen Fletcher’s reply. Of COURSE all lives matter, …. but when Black lives are so undervalued in our society, it is time to say: wake up and see that Black lives matter and should not be swept under the carpet as if they were dirt. I made a conscious decision after seeing George Floyd murdered before my very eyes, that I would steep myself in reading about the racial problems and disparities in the U.S. (walking in another’s shoes). I learned a lot. [Also, I spent time in Montgomery, AL, in my elementary years, so I have seen racism far back into segregation >> and our trip to a more equal future.] We live in a very white culture, with laws purposely made for the white benefit …. so we have a long way to go, if we want the arc of justice to bend forward, as our beautiful words & purpose state. And we CAN, if we’re honest with ourselves, and want better for all, not just ourselves, our own tribe. And I’m not naive; not a pollyanna; just love the idea of America and want to help her grow forward.

Martha Eberle February 9, 2022 at 7:57 pm Reply Reply   

Thank you Dee Nagel, for what you do. I only give monthly — you do the real work. thank you

We've helped free more than 240 innocent people from prison. Support our work to strengthen and advance the innocence movement.

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.

• Social Forces

Exacerbating Inequality over the Life-Course: Examining Race Differences in the Reciprocal Effects between Incarceration and Income

• Ian A. Silver , Christopher D'Amato , John Wooldredge
• Oxford University Press
• Volume 102, Number 3, March 2024
• pp. 839-860
• View Citation

Additional Information

Relative to Whites, Blacks face lower odds of gaining employment with notable wages while also facing longer terms of incarceration when sent to jail or prison for criminal offenses. Although a variety of factors contribute to these patterns, the time a Black individual spends incarcerated could decrease future earnings, whereas lower earnings could increase the time spent incarcerated. Nevertheless, prior research has yet to consider—or evaluate—the reciprocal association between income and incarceration, limiting our ability to discern how involvement in the criminal justice system contributes to the racial gap in income between Black and Whites. Using the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997, the current study evaluated the influence of time spent incarcerated and income on future time spent incarcerated and income of Blacks and Whites. A lagged Latent Curve Model with Structured Residuals was estimated to examine the between- and within-individual reciprocal effects of months incarcerated and income. The findings suggested that a 1 month increase in time spent incarcerated for Blacks resulted in a 300–600 dollar decrease in income during the subsequent measurement period, an effect that was not observed for Whites. It appears that time spent incarcerated reduces future earnings for justice-involved Blacks. Overall, findings suggest that the criminal justice system contributes to the income gap that exists more generally between Blacks and Whites in the United States.

Project MUSE Mission

Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.

2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

+1 (410) 516-6989 [email protected]

©2024 Project MUSE. Produced by Johns Hopkins University Press in collaboration with The Sheridan Libraries.

Now and Always, The Trusted Content Your Research Requires

Built on the Johns Hopkins University Campus

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Black Americans Have a Clear Vision for Reducing Racism but Little Hope It Will Happen

Many say key U.S. institutions should be rebuilt to ensure fair treatment

Table of contents.

• Black Americans see little improvement in their lives despite increased national attention to racial issues
• Few Black adults expect equality for Black people in the U.S.
• Black adults say racism and police brutality are extremely big problems for Black people in the U.S.
• Personal experiences with discrimination are widespread among Black Americans
• Black adults see voting as the most effective strategy for moving toward equality in the U.S.
• Some Black adults see Black businesses and communities as effective remedies for inequality
• Black Americans say race matters little when choosing political allies
• The legacy of slavery affects Black Americans today
• Most Black adults agree the descendants of enslaved people should be repaid
• The types of repayment Black adults think would be most helpful
• Responsibility for reparations and the likelihood repayment will occur
• Black adults say the criminal justice system needs to be completely rebuilt
• Black adults say political, economic and health care systems need major changes to ensure fair treatment
• Most Black adults say funding for police departments should stay the same or increase
• Acknowledgments
• Appendix: Supplemental tables
• The American Trends Panel survey methodology

Pew Research Center conducted this analysis to understand the nuances among Black people on issues of racial inequality and social change in the United States. This in-depth survey explores differences among Black Americans in their views on the social status of the Black population in the U.S.; their assessments of racial inequality; their visions for institutional and social change; and their outlook on the chances that these improvements will be made. The analysis is the latest in the Center’s series of in-depth surveys of public opinion among Black Americans (read the first, “ Faith Among Black Americans ” and “ Race Is Central to Identity for Black Americans and Affects How They Connect With Each Other ”).

The online survey of 3,912 Black U.S. adults was conducted Oct. 4-17, 2021. Black U.S. adults include those who are single-race, non-Hispanic Black Americans; multiracial non-Hispanic Black Americans; and adults who indicate they are Black and Hispanic. The survey includes 1,025 Black adults on Pew Research Center’s American Trends Panel (ATP) and 2,887 Black adults on Ipsos’ KnowledgePanel. Respondents on both panels are recruited through national, random sampling of residential addresses.

Recruiting panelists by phone or mail ensures that nearly all U.S. Black adults have a chance of selection. This gives us confidence that any sample can represent the whole population (see our Methods 101 explainer on random sampling). Here are the questions used for the survey of Black adults, along with its responses and methodology .

The terms “Black Americans,” “Black people” and “Black adults” are used interchangeably throughout this report to refer to U.S. adults who self-identify as Black, either alone or in combination with other races or Hispanic identity.

Throughout this report, “Black, non-Hispanic” respondents are those who identify as single-race Black and say they have no Hispanic background. “Black Hispanic” respondents are those who identify as Black and say they have Hispanic background. We use the terms “Black Hispanic” and “Hispanic Black” interchangeably. “Multiracial” respondents are those who indicate two or more racial backgrounds (one of which is Black) and say they are not Hispanic.

Respondents were asked a question about how important being Black was to how they think about themselves. In this report, we use the term “being Black” when referencing responses to this question.

In this report, “immigrant” refers to people who were not U.S. citizens at birth – in other words, those born outside the U.S., Puerto Rico or other U.S. territories to parents who were not U.S. citizens. We use the terms “immigrant,” “born abroad” and “foreign-born” interchangeably.

Throughout this report, “Democrats and Democratic leaners” and just “Democrats” both refer to respondents who identify politically with the Democratic Party or who are independent or some other party but lean toward the Democratic Party. “Republicans and Republican leaners” and just “Republicans” both refer to respondents who identify politically with the Republican Party or are independent or some other party but lean toward the Republican Party.

Respondents were asked a question about their voter registration status. In this report, respondents are considered registered to vote if they self-report being absolutely certain they are registered at their current address. Respondents are considered not registered to vote if they report not being registered or express uncertainty about their registration.

To create the upper-, middle- and lower-income tiers, respondents’ 2020 family incomes were adjusted for differences in purchasing power by geographic region and household size. Respondents were then placed into income tiers: “Middle income” is defined as two-thirds to double the median annual income for the entire survey sample. “Lower income” falls below that range, and “upper income” lies above it. For more information about how the income tiers were created, read the methodology .

More than a year after the murder of George Floyd and the national protests, debate and political promises that ensued, 65% of Black Americans say the increased national attention on racial inequality has not led to changes that improved their lives. 1 And 44% say equality for Black people in the United States is not likely to be achieved, according to newly released findings from an October 2021 survey of Black Americans by Pew Research Center.

This is somewhat of a reversal in views from September 2020, when half of Black adults said the increased national focus on issues of race would lead to major policy changes to address racial inequality in the country and 56% expected changes that would make their lives better.

At the same time, many Black Americans are concerned about racial discrimination and its impact. Roughly eight-in-ten say they have personally experienced discrimination because of their race or ethnicity (79%), and most also say discrimination is the main reason many Black people cannot get ahead (68%).  

Even so, Black Americans have a clear vision for how to achieve change when it comes to racial inequality. This includes support for significant reforms to or complete overhauls of several U.S. institutions to ensure fair treatment, particularly the criminal justice system; political engagement, primarily in the form of voting; support for Black businesses to advance Black communities; and reparations in the forms of educational, business and homeownership assistance. Yet alongside their assessments of inequality and ideas about progress exists pessimism about whether U.S. society and its institutions will change in ways that would reduce racism.

These findings emerge from an extensive Pew Research Center survey of 3,912 Black Americans conducted online Oct. 4-17, 2021. The survey explores how Black Americans assess their position in U.S. society and their ideas about social change. Overall, Black Americans are clear on what they think the problems are facing the country and how to remedy them. However, they are skeptical that meaningful changes will take place in their lifetime.

Black Americans see racism in our laws as a big problem and discrimination as a roadblock to progress

Black adults were asked in the survey to assess the current nature of racism in the United States and whether structural or individual sources of this racism are a bigger problem for Black people. About half of Black adults (52%) say racism in our laws is a bigger problem than racism by individual people, while four-in-ten (43%) say acts of racism committed by individual people is the bigger problem. Only 3% of Black adults say that Black people do not experience discrimination in the U.S. today.

In assessing the magnitude of problems that they face, the majority of Black Americans say racism (63%), police brutality (60%) and economic inequality (54%) are extremely or very big problems for Black people living in the U.S. Slightly smaller shares say the same about the affordability of health care (47%), limitations on voting (46%), and the quality of K-12 schools (40%).

Aside from their critiques of U.S. institutions, Black adults also feel the impact of racial inequality personally. Most Black adults say they occasionally or frequently experience unfair treatment because of their race or ethnicity (79%), and two-thirds (68%) cite racial discrimination as the main reason many Black people cannot get ahead today.

Black Americans’ views on reducing racial inequality

Black Americans are clear on the challenges they face because of racism. They are also clear on the solutions. These range from overhauls of policing practices and the criminal justice system to civic engagement and reparations to descendants of people enslaved in the United States.

Changing U.S. institutions such as policing, courts and prison systems

About nine-in-ten Black adults say multiple aspects of the criminal justice system need some kind of change (minor, major or a complete overhaul) to ensure fair treatment, with nearly all saying so about policing (95%), the courts and judicial process (95%), and the prison system (94%).

Roughly half of Black adults say policing (49%), the courts and judicial process (48%), and the prison system (54%) need to be completely rebuilt for Black people to be treated fairly. Smaller shares say the same about the political system (42%), the economic system (37%) and the health care system (34%), according to the October survey.

While Black Americans are in favor of significant changes to policing, most want spending on police departments in their communities to stay the same (39%) or increase (35%). A little more than one-in-five (23%) think spending on police departments in their area should be decreased.

Black adults who favor decreases in police spending are most likely to name medical, mental health and social services (40%) as the top priority for those reappropriated funds. Smaller shares say K-12 schools (25%), roads, water systems and other infrastructure (12%), and reducing taxes (13%) should be the top priority.

Voting and ‘buying Black’ viewed as important strategies for Black community advancement

Black Americans also have clear views on the types of political and civic engagement they believe will move Black communities forward. About six-in-ten Black adults say voting (63%) and supporting Black businesses or “buying Black” (58%) are extremely or very effective strategies for moving Black people toward equality in the U.S. Smaller though still significant shares say the same about volunteering with organizations dedicated to Black equality (48%), protesting (42%) and contacting elected officials (40%).

Black adults were also asked about the effectiveness of Black economic and political independence in moving them toward equality. About four-in-ten (39%) say Black ownership of all businesses in Black neighborhoods would be an extremely or very effective strategy for moving toward racial equality, while roughly three-in-ten (31%) say the same about establishing a national Black political party. And about a quarter of Black adults (27%) say having Black neighborhoods governed entirely by Black elected officials would be extremely or very effective in moving Black people toward equality.

Most Black Americans support repayment for slavery

Discussions about atonement for slavery predate the founding of the United States. As early as 1672 , Quaker abolitionists advocated for enslaved people to be paid for their labor once they were free. And in recent years, some U.S. cities and institutions have implemented reparations policies to do just that.

Most Black Americans say the legacy of slavery affects the position of Black people in the U.S. either a great deal (55%) or a fair amount (30%), according to the survey. And roughly three-quarters (77%) say descendants of people enslaved in the U.S. should be repaid in some way.

Black adults who say descendants of the enslaved should be repaid support doing so in different ways. About eight-in-ten say repayment in the forms of educational scholarships (80%), financial assistance for starting or improving a business (77%), and financial assistance for buying or remodeling a home (76%) would be extremely or very helpful. A slightly smaller share (69%) say cash payments would be extremely or very helpful forms of repayment for the descendants of enslaved people.

Where the responsibility for repayment lies is also clear for Black Americans. Among those who say the descendants of enslaved people should be repaid, 81% say the U.S. federal government should have all or most of the responsibility for repayment. About three-quarters (76%) say businesses and banks that profited from slavery should bear all or most of the responsibility for repayment. And roughly six-in-ten say the same about colleges and universities that benefited from slavery (63%) and descendants of families who engaged in the slave trade (60%).

Black Americans are skeptical change will happen

Even though Black Americans’ visions for social change are clear, very few expect them to be implemented. Overall, 44% of Black adults say equality for Black people in the U.S. is a little or not at all likely. A little over a third (38%) say it is somewhat likely and only 13% say it is extremely or very likely.

They also do not think specific institutions will change. Two-thirds of Black adults say changes to the prison system (67%) and the courts and judicial process (65%) that would ensure fair treatment for Black people are a little or not at all likely in their lifetime. About six-in-ten (58%) say the same about policing. Only about one-in-ten say changes to policing (13%), the courts and judicial process (12%), and the prison system (11%) are extremely or very likely.

This pessimism is not only about the criminal justice system. The majority of Black adults say the political (63%), economic (62%) and health care (51%) systems are also unlikely to change in their lifetime.

Black Americans’ vision for social change includes reparations. However, much like their pessimism about institutional change, very few think they will see reparations in their lifetime. Among Black adults who say the descendants of people enslaved in the U.S. should be repaid, 82% say reparations for slavery are unlikely to occur in their lifetime. About one-in-ten (11%) say repayment is somewhat likely, while only 7% say repayment is extremely or very likely to happen in their lifetime.

Black Democrats, Republicans differ on assessments of inequality and visions for social change

Party affiliation is one key point of difference among Black Americans in their assessments of racial inequality and their visions for social change. Black Republicans and Republican leaners are more likely than Black Democrats and Democratic leaners to focus on the acts of individuals. For example, when summarizing the nature of racism against Black people in the U.S., the majority of Black Republicans (59%) say racist acts committed by individual people is a bigger problem for Black people than racism in our laws. Black Democrats (41%) are less likely to hold this view.

Black Republicans (45%) are also more likely than Black Democrats (21%) to say that Black people who cannot get ahead in the U.S. are mostly responsible for their own condition. And while similar shares of Black Republicans (79%) and Democrats (80%) say they experience racial discrimination on a regular basis, Republicans (64%) are more likely than Democrats (36%) to say that most Black people who want to get ahead can make it if they are willing to work hard.

On the other hand, Black Democrats are more likely than Black Republicans to focus on the impact that racial inequality has on Black Americans. Seven-in-ten Black Democrats (73%) say racial discrimination is the main reason many Black people cannot get ahead in the U.S, while about four-in-ten Black Republicans (44%) say the same. And Black Democrats are more likely than Black Republicans to say racism (67% vs. 46%) and police brutality (65% vs. 44%) are extremely big problems for Black people today.

Black Democrats are also more critical of U.S. institutions than Black Republicans are. For example, Black Democrats are more likely than Black Republicans to say the prison system (57% vs. 35%), policing (52% vs. 29%) and the courts and judicial process (50% vs. 35%) should be completely rebuilt for Black people to be treated fairly.

While the share of Black Democrats who want to see large-scale changes to the criminal justice system exceeds that of Black Republicans, they share similar views on police funding. Four-in-ten each of Black Democrats and Black Republicans say funding for police departments in their communities should remain the same, while around a third of each partisan coalition (36% and 37%, respectively) says funding should increase. Only about one-in-four Black Democrats (24%) and one-in-five Black Republicans (21%) say funding for police departments in their communities should decrease.

Among the survey’s other findings:

Black adults differ by age in their views on political strategies. Black adults ages 65 and older (77%) are most likely to say voting is an extremely or very effective strategy for moving Black people toward equality. They are significantly more likely than Black adults ages 18 to 29 (48%) and 30 to 49 (60%) to say this. Black adults 65 and older (48%) are also more likely than those ages 30 to 49 (38%) and 50 to 64 (42%) to say protesting is an extremely or very effective strategy. Roughly four-in-ten Black adults ages 18 to 29 say this (44%).

Gender plays a role in how Black adults view policing. Though majorities of Black women (65%) and men (56%) say police brutality is an extremely big problem for Black people living in the U.S. today, Black women are more likely than Black men to hold this view. When it comes to criminal justice, Black women (56%) and men (51%) are about equally likely to share the view that the prison system should be completely rebuilt to ensure fair treatment of Black people. However, Black women (52%) are slightly more likely than Black men (45%) to say this about policing. On the matter of police funding, Black women (39%) are slightly more likely than Black men (31%) to say police funding in their communities should be increased. On the other hand, Black men are more likely than Black women to prefer that funding stay the same (44% vs. 36%). Smaller shares of both Black men (23%) and women (22%) would like to see police funding decreased.

Income impacts Black adults’ views on reparations. Roughly eight-in-ten Black adults with lower (78%), middle (77%) and upper incomes (79%) say the descendants of people enslaved in the U.S. should receive reparations. Among those who support reparations, Black adults with upper and middle incomes (both 84%) are more likely than those with lower incomes (75%) to say educational scholarships would be an extremely or very helpful form of repayment. However, of those who support reparations, Black adults with lower (72%) and middle incomes (68%) are more likely than those with higher incomes (57%) to say cash payments would be an extremely or very helpful form of repayment for slavery.

• Black adults in the September 2020 survey only include those who say their race is Black alone and are non-Hispanic. The same is true only for the questions of improvements to Black people’s lives and equality in the United States in the October 2021 survey. Throughout the rest of this report, Black adults include those who say their race is Black alone and non-Hispanic; those who say their race is Black and at least one other race and non-Hispanic; or Black and Hispanic, unless otherwise noted. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Black Americans
• Discrimination & Prejudice
• Economic Inequality
• Race, Ethnicity & Politics

A look at Black-owned businesses in the U.S.

8 facts about black americans and the news, black americans’ views on success in the u.s., among black adults, those with higher incomes are most likely to say they are happy, fewer than half of black americans say the news often covers the issues that are important to them, most popular, report materials.

• American Trends Panel Wave 97

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Age & Generations
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Economy & Work
• Family & Relationships
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Immigration & Migration
• International Affairs
• Internet & Technology
• Methodological Research
• News Habits & Media
• Non-U.S. Governments
• Other Topics
• Politics & Policy
• Race & Ethnicity
• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

Copyright 2024 Pew Research Center

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookie Settings

Reprints, Permissions & Use Policy

In association with the International Commission of Jurists

Race, Nationality and the True Color of International Criminal Justice

09 May Race, Nationality and the True Color of International Criminal Justice

[Chuka Arinze-Onyia is a Nigeria-based lawyer with an avid interest in international criminal justice and other adjacent subjects]

Introduction

Race and nationality play critical roles in understanding and experiencing international criminal justice. While international justice may ultimately aim to address prohibited crimes committed anywhere in the world without regard to the status of the perpetrator or victim, in practice however, it continues to perpetuate existing “ global structural inequalities”. Clarke believes that racial and national biases heavily influence the nature of crimes punished by international law, its temporal jurisdiction, and prosecutorial discretion.. 

The goal of international justice is to ensure accountability for individuals no matter their status or nationality for conduct prohibited by international law. Therefore, nobody can be dismissive of its great utility. On the other hand, the system functions in a way that creates disparate experiences for persons of different nationalities and color, reinforces colonial aspirations and maintains existing power structures.  

This blog will demonstrate that systemic failures particularly with the exercise of voluntary state cooperation, have led to the oppression of African defendants before international justice mechanisms. It will also demonstrate a more intentional discriminatory practice and entrenchment of double standards in prosecutorial selectivity, and the exercise of universal jurisdiction which are consequential to persons of non-Western backgrounds.

State Cooperation as a Tool for Discrimination

State cooperation is vital to the survival of any international justice mechanism. Unless states support international justice mechanisms in arresting persons of interest, financing the system and even executing prison sentences, the system will collapse. The Rome Statute (see parts 9 and 10 ) recognizes the importance of cooperation, and demands it of all state parties, as do the various statutes of the UN ad hoc tribunals.

Unfortunately, even when masked in mandatory terms, cooperation remains mostly voluntary, as states retain their sovereignty in the international justice system. States decide if, when and how to cooperate with tribunals in any situation. This sort of selective cooperation has led to worse outcomes for African defendants before international justice mechanisms than what may be experienced by their European counterparts. 

The weaponization of cooperation became evident in both the provisional and final release of African defendants at the UN ad hoc tribunals and International Criminal Court (ICC). A requirement for provisional release by international tribunals, is that there be a state willing to make guarantees to enforce the conditions of release, if the defendant is released in their territory (see Simic and Bemba , para 106). European defendants of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) had no problem satisfying this condition as their home countries were usually willing to make the necessary guarantees. On the other hand, many African defendants including the Rwandans of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) cannot safely return their home state because the government of the day is hostile to them. Therefore, they can only be released to third states, and such third states are very hard to come by. It is for this reason that provisional release was virtually non-existent at the ICTR ,  and similarly rare in the ICC, where defendants were found eligible for provisional release, but remained in detention because no state would accept them (see Mokom and Bemba ).

This pattern replicates itself during final releases. African defendants have continued to be held in custody, years after they were acquitted or ordered to be released on completion of their sentences. Existing risks of human rights violation including violation of the non bis in idem rule , mean that some Africans cannot safely return home after trial and require the cooperation of third states to resettle. The UN’s solution to this problem was to build a safehouse in Arusha, where the ex-defendants are held until a safe third country is found. This is certainly not a viable solution as defendants spent years in the safehouse with limited freedom. An attempt to resettle some of the ex-defendants in Niger under a relocation agreement failed, as they were promptly arrested and currently are held under house arrest, after Niger decided to stop cooperating with the mechanism. Some have died in custody of the mechanism years after they were due for release.  In sharp contrast, the ICTY has had no problem with releasing defendants, as sometimes they are welcomed home to much fanfare.  

One might argue that the situation is not inherently tied to race or nationality, as the rules of provisional release were not made to target Africans. These rules apply equally to all persons and therefore, it is wrong to attribute this tricky situation to racism, when it is exacerbated by the internal politics of the defendant’s country. For instance, Limaj and other defendants of the ICTY could not secure provisional release because the UN Mission in Kosovo was unable to make the required guarantees. When Kosovo gained more stability, the authorities were able to make the necessary guarantees to obtain provisional release for their citizens. This argument is further supported by Ble Goude ’s situation, where after an extended time in ICC custody post-acquittal, he was finally able to return to Cote d’Ivoire when the internal politics were favorable to him. So, if the situation with releasing African defendants back to their home countries is attributable to internal politics, there is very little the international justice system can do to intervene.

While some blame for the inability of Africans to secure provisional or final release is attributable to internal politics, it is also very apparent that the international community have not bothered to find lasting alternatives. If the operation of the rule requiring voluntarily given state guarantees for the provisional release of defendants, will lead to worse outcomes for Africans, then there is an inherent responsibility for criminal tribunals to find solutions. Simply importing an ICTY rule into the ICTR and subsequently the ICC, without regard to the diverse circumstances of individual defendants will inevitably lead to unequal outcomes. The ICTR may claim that it could not predict how difficult provisional release will be for Africans given the operation of this rule. However, the ICC which imported this rule several years later at a time when it had exclusively African defendants in its docket, cannot rely on the same excuse, as the unequal consequences of the operation of this rule on Africans had been evident in the ICTR for years. This color-blind judicial rule making can only be a disaster in a system created to deal with an incredibly diverse range of defendants. Therefore, the peculiarities of each group must be well considered before rule making. A justice system in which Europeans can secure provisional release while Africans cannot, is not fair, whatever the reason may be. 

Also problematic is the nonchalant attitudes of states to this African plight. States have been aware of the problem with the final release of African defendants even before Andre Ntagerura’s acquittal was confirmed in 2006 leaving him with nowhere to go, and no state to resettle in. He was held in the Arusha safehouse, until he was relocated to Niger, where he is currently held under house arrest. Despite requests by the defendants for states to be compelled to assist in the resettlement of ICTR defendants, the tribunal has continued to hold that states have the discretion to decide whether to assist. Delgado has pointed out that “racial unfairness” is inevitable in situations where discretion plays a role in criminal justice. Unless states are compulsorily required to protect the rights of African defendants, they will not do so. This failure of the entire system to address the plight of black defendants, delegitimizes it.  

Discriminatory Selectivity in Prosecution

“The “African bias” is a baseless accusation. I will not apologize for protecting the rights of African victims…you have to choose your side to protect the criminals or their victims.” Luis Moreno-Ocampo

The legitimacy of international justice is further challenged by the exercise of prosecutorial discretion  in a manner that has been detrimental to persons of color. This section will argue that international justice continues to be a tool for perpetuating inequality, by protecting the interests of Europeans while policing the activities of persons of color in a neo-colonialist way. 

The first international justice project in Nuremberg and Tokyo was established to address large scale atrocity crimes committed against Europeans. Meanwhile crimes of similar nature committed in Africa, the Americas, Australia and Asia by Europeans in the colonial era were completely ignored. Savvias argues that international criminal law does not recognize crimes committed by Europeans on non-white bodies. However, it is completely able to address crimes committed against Europeans.

It is this prioritization of the European victim that led to the creation of the ICTY to address crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia. While some may point to the ICTR created a year later as evidence of a similar attempt to address crimes committed against Africans, Mutua believes that the creation of the ICTR was not from genuine intent to address genocide. Instead, it was established because “the powerful states that control it could not reject a tribunal for Rwanda when they had set one up for the former Yugoslavia; formally, white European lives were put on the same footing with black African lives.” And yet justice was experienced differently in the two tribunals as analyzed above. The establishment of the ICC did not remove focus from the prioritization of white lives as the court’s largest and most efficient investigation has been in Ukraine, where the court also conducted an unprecedented campaign to raise funds to support the investigation. 

However, the ICC paved the way for a period when international justice became very committed to prosecuting Africans. Despite having a docket made up exclusively of Africans, when accused of having an African bias, Moreno-Ocampo dismissed these allegations as transparent propaganda originated by Al-Bashir to divide Africa’s support for the ICC and thwart the ICC’s investigation in Sudan. Ignoring the fact that the Sudan referral was conditioned on the court not investigating or prosecuting Americans who may have committed crimes in the country.

The allegations of bias and apparent double standards have only gained traction over the years. From the strange decision not to investigate British crimes in Iraq, to the decision to deprioritize aspects of the Afghanistan situation dealing with American crimes, the court has made little effort to maintain the semblance of neutrality as it has consistently shown great aversion for prosecuting Western countries.

And then there is the question of Palestine, which has generated much debate. The inaction of the international criminal justice system as the civilian population of Gaza is systematically decimated is not only jarring but appalling. Senior Israeli state officials have publicly call ed for genocide, and starvation is notoriously being used as a weapon of war. At least 25000 civilians , many of them children, have been killed by Israel in Gaza, and beyond stating that it has jurisdiction in Gaza, the ICC has made no apparent progress. Unlike in Ukraine, there has not been a widespread influx of voluntary contributions to the court , though Belgium has pledged a significant amount to support the court’s investigation. There are no talks of establishing a tribunal to investigate the crimes being committed in the conflict. Once again, it appears that an ally of the West, in this case Israel, enjoys impunity for crimes committed against persons of color. Human Rights Watch correctly assert s that these brazen attacks on civilians are the legacy of decades of impunity and lack of accountability.

Finally, there is the selective use of universal jurisdiction in a manner that can only be described as a form of neo-colonialism. Non-Europeans have been disproportionately prosecuted in the realm of domestic enforcement of international criminal law. As an ideal, the fact that any country can prosecute anyone found to have committed crimes under international law, is great and should be supported. In reality, the exercise of universal jurisdiction disproportionately affects defendants of color. Over 90 percent of cases prosecuted on the basis of universal jurisdiction have occurred in Western Europe. And the defendants have scarcely ever been Europeans. While the cases are largely legitimate and should be prosecuted, one cannot help but wonder why this same system has not been used to ensure accountability for crimes  committed abroad by Western nations.

Eradicating the racial and national biases that shape the current global experience of the international justice system is not just a moral imperative, but also critical for its legitimacy. Decisive reformatory actions must be taken to embed racial equality in all aspects of  the justice system. The shameful problem of discriminatory access to provisional and final release could be addressed by making state cooperation mandatory in matters of release or by compelling host states to play a more proactive role in guaranteeing the freedom of defendants until a final resolution is found.

Difficult as it may be, the international justice system must strive to exist above the racial power structures prevalent in global politics. It cannot be a tool for securing impunity for one group, while prosecuting others. Prosecutors must respond to crimes committed by white persons against persons of color, with the same fervor that they address crimes committed by Europeans in Europe. No country or person should be considered untouchable and impunity in all its forms must be shunned.

Leave a Reply

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

The Happiness Gap Between Left and Right Isn’t Closing

By Thomas B. Edsall

Mr. Edsall contributes a weekly column from Washington, D.C., on politics, demographics and inequality.

Why is it that a substantial body of social science research finds that conservatives are happier than liberals?

A partial answer: Those on the right are less likely to be angered or upset by social and economic inequities, believing that the system rewards those who work hard, that hierarchies are part of the natural order of things and that market outcomes are fundamentally fair.

Those on the left stand in opposition to each of these assessments of the social order, prompting frustration and discontent with the world around them.

The happiness gap has been with us for at least 50 years, and most research seeking to explain it has focused on conservatives. More recently, however, psychologists and other social scientists have begun to dig deeper into the underpinnings of liberal discontent — not only unhappiness but also depression and other measures of dissatisfaction.

One of the findings emerging from this research is that the decline in happiness and in a sense of agency is concentrated among those on the left who stress matters of identity, social justice and the oppression of marginalized groups.

There is, in addition, a parallel phenomenon taking place on the right as Donald Trump and his MAGA loyalists angrily complain of oppression by liberals who engage in a relentless vendetta to keep Trump out of the White House.

There is a difference in the way the left and right react to frustration and grievance. Instead of despair, the contemporary right has responded with mounting anger, rejecting democratic institutions and norms.

In a 2021 Vox article, “ Trump and the Republican Revolt Against Democracy ,” Zack Beauchamp described in detail the emergence of destructive and aggressive discontent among conservatives.

Citing a wide range of polling data and academic studies, Beauchamp found:

More than twice as many Republicans (39 percent) as Democrats (17 percent) believed that “if elected leaders won’t protect America, the people must act — even if that means violence.”

Fifty-seven percent of Republicans considered Democrats to be “enemies,” compared with 41 percent of Democrats who viewed Republicans as “enemies.”

Among Republicans, support for “the use of force to defend our way of life,” as well as for the belief that “strong leaders bend rules” and that “sometimes you have to take the law in your own hands,” grows stronger in direct correlation with racial and ethnic hostility.

Trump has repeatedly warned of the potential for political violence. In January he predicted bedlam if the criminal charges filed in federal and state courts against him damaged his presidential campaign:

I think they feel this is the way they’re going to try and win, and that’s not the way it goes. It’ll be bedlam in the country. It’s a very bad thing. It’s a very bad precedent. As we said, it’s the opening of a Pandora’s box.

Before he was indicted in New York, Trump claimed there would be “potential death and destruction” if he was charged.

At an Ohio campaign rally in March, Trump declared, “If I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a blood bath for the whole country.”

In other words, Trump and his allies respond to adversity and what they see as attacks from the left with threats and anger, while a segment of the left often but not always responds to adversity and social inequity with dejection and sorrow.

There are significant consequences for this internalization.

Jamin Halberstadt , a professor of psychology at the University of Otago in New Zealand and a co-author of “ Outgroup Threat and the Emergence of Cohesive Groups : A Cross-Cultural Examination,” argued in his emailed reply to my inquiry that because “a focus on injustice and victimhood is, by definition, disempowering (isn’t that why we talk of ‘survivors’ rather than ‘victims’?), loss of control is not good for self-esteem or happiness.”

But, he pointed out:

this focus, while no doubt a part of the most visible and influential side of progressive ideology, is still just a part. Liberalism is a big construct, and I’m reluctant to reduce it to a focus on social justice issues. Some liberals have this view, but I suspect their influence is outsized because (a) they have the social media megaphone and (b) we are in a climate in which freedom of expression and, in particular, challenges to the worldview you characterize have been curtailed.

Expanding on this line of argument, Halberstadt wrote:

I’m sure some self-described liberals have views that are counterproductive to their own happiness. One sub-ideology associated with liberalism is, as you describe, a sense of victimhood and grievance. But there is more than one way to respond to structural barriers. Within that group of the aggrieved, some probably see systemic problems that cannot be overcome, and that’s naturally demoralizing and depressing. But others see systemic problems as a challenge to overcome.

Taking Halberstadt’s assessment of the effects of grievance and victimhood a step farther, Timothy A. Judge , the chairman of the department of management and human resources at Notre Dame, wrote in a 2009 paper, “ Core Self-Evaluations and Work Success ”:

Core self-evaluations (C.S.E.) is a broad, integrative trait indicated by self-esteem, locus of control, generalized self-efficacy and (low) neuroticism (high emotional stability). Individuals with high levels of C.S.E. perform better on their jobs, are more successful in their careers, are more satisfied with their jobs and lives, report lower levels of stress and conflict, cope more effectively with setbacks and better capitalize on advantages and opportunities.

I asked Judge and other scholars a question: Have liberal pessimists fostered an outlook that spawns unhappiness as its adherents believe they face seemingly insurmountable structural barriers?

Judge replied by email:

I do share the perspective that a focus on status, hierarchies and institutions that reinforce privilege contributes to an external locus of control. And the reason is fairly straightforward. We can only change these things through collective and, often, policy initiatives — which tend to be complex, slow, often conflictual and outside our individual control. On the other hand, if I view “life’s chances” (Virginia Woolf’s term) to be mostly dependent on my own agency, this reflects an internal focus, which will often depend on enacting initiatives largely within my control.

Judge elaborated on his argument:

If our predominant focus in how we view the world is social inequities, status hierarchies, societal unfairness conferred by privilege, then everyone would agree that these things are not easy to fix, which means, in a sense, we must accept some unhappy premises: Life isn’t fair; outcomes are outside my control, often at the hands of bad, powerful actors; social change depends on collective action that may be conflictual; an individual may have limited power to control their own destiny, etc. These are not happy thoughts because they cause me to view the world as inherently unfair, oppressive, conflictual, etc. It may or may not be right, but I would argue that these are in fact viewpoints of how we view the world, and our place in it, that would undermine our happiness.

Last year, George Yancey , a professor of sociology at Baylor University, published “ Identity Politics, Political Ideology, and Well-Being : Is Identity Politics Good for Our Well-Being?”

Yancey argued that recent events “suggest that identity politics may correlate to a decrease in well-being, particularly among young progressives, and offer an explanation tied to internal elements within political progressiveness.”

By focusing on “political progressives, rather than political conservatives,” Yancey wrote, “a nuanced approach to understanding the relationship between political ideology and well-being begins to emerge.”

Identity politics, he continued, focuses “on external institutional forces that one cannot immediately alleviate.” It results in what scholars call the externalization of one’s locus of control, or viewing the inequities of society as a result of powerful if not insurmountable outside forces, including structural racism, patriarchy and capitalism, as opposed to believing that individuals can overcome such obstacles through hard work and collective effort.

As a result, Yancey wrote, “identity politics may be an important mechanism by which progressive political ideology can lead to lower levels of well-being.”

Conversely, Yancey pointed out, “a class-based progressive cognitive emphasis may focus less on the group identity, generating less of a need to rely on emotional narratives and dichotomous thinking and may be less likely to be detrimental to the well-being of a political progressive.”

Yancey tested this theory using data collected in the 2021 Baylor Religion Survey of 1,232 respondents.

“Certain types of political progressive ideology can have contrasting effects on well-being,” Yancey wrote. “It is plausible that identity politics may explain the recent increase well-being gap between conservatives and progressives.”

Oskari Lahtinen , a senior researcher in psychology at the University of Turku in Finland, published a study in March, “ Construction and Validation of a Scale for Assessing Critical Social Justice Attitudes ,” that reinforces Yancey’s argument.

Lahtinen conducted two surveys of a total of 5,878 men and women to determine the share of Finnish citizens who held “critical social justice attitudes” and how those who held such views differed from those who did not.

Critical social justice proponents, on Lahtinen’s scale,

point out varieties of oppression that cause privileged people (e.g., male, white, heterosexual, cisgender) to benefit over marginalized people (e.g., woman, Black, gay, transgender). In critical race theory, some of the core tenets include that (1) white supremacy and racism are omnipresent and colorblind policies are not enough to tackle them, (2) people of color have their own unique standpoint and (3) races are social constructs.

What did Lahtinen find?

The critical social justice propositions encountered

strong rejection from men. Women expressed more than twice as much support for the propositions. In both studies, critical social justice was correlated modestly with depression, anxiety, and (lack of) happiness, but not more so than being on the political left was.

In an email responding to my inquiries about his paper, Lahtinen wrote that one of the key findings in his research was that “there were large differences between genders in critical social justice advocacy: Three out of five women but only one out of seven men expressed support for the critical social justice claims.”

In addition, he pointed out, “there was one variable in the study that closely corresponded to external locus of control: ‘Other people or structures are more responsible for my well-being than I myself am.’”

The correlation between agreement with this statement and unhappiness was among the strongest in the survey:

People on the left endorsed this item (around 2 on a scale of 0 to 4) far more than people on the right (around 0.5). Endorsing the belief was determined by political party preference much more than by gender, for instance.

Such measures as locus of control, self-esteem, a belief in personal agency and optimism all play major roles in daily life.

In a December 2022 paper, “ The Politics of Depression : Diverging Trends in Internalizing Symptoms Among U.S. Adolescents by Political Beliefs,” Catherine Gimbrone , Lisa M. Bates , Seth Prins and Katherine M. Keyes , all at Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health, noted that “trends in adolescent internalizing symptoms diverged by political beliefs, sex and parental education over time, with female liberal adolescents experiencing the largest increases in depressive symptoms, especially in the context of demographic risk factors, including parental education.”

“These findings,” they added, “indicate a growing mental health disparity between adolescents who identify with certain political beliefs. It is therefore possible that the ideological lenses through which adolescents view the political climate differentially affect their mental well-being.”

Gimbrone and her co-authors based their work on studies of 85,000 teenagers from 2005 to 2018. They found that

while internalizing symptom scores worsened over time for all adolescents, they deteriorated most quickly for female liberal adolescents. Beginning in approximately 2010 and continuing through 2018, female liberal adolescents reported the largest changes in depressive affect, self-esteem, self-derogation and loneliness.

In conclusion, the authors wrote, “socially underprivileged liberals reported the worst internalizing symptom scores over time, likely indicating that the experiences and beliefs that inform a liberal political identity are ultimately less protective against poor mental health than those that inform a conservative political identity.”

From another vantage point, Nick Haslam , a professor of psychology at the University of Melbourne, argued in his 2020 paper “ Harm Inflation: Making Sense of Concept Creep ” that recent years have seen “a rising sensitivity to harm within at least some Western cultures, such that previously innocuous or unremarked phenomena were increasingly identified as harmful and that this rising sensitivity reflected a politically liberal moral agenda.”

As examples, Haslam wrote that the definition of “trauma” has been

progressively broadened to include adverse life events of decreasing severity and those experienced vicariously rather than directly. “Mental disorder” came to include a wider range of conditions, so that new forms of psychopathology were added in each revision of diagnostic manuals and the threshold for diagnosing some existing forms was lowered. “Abuse” extended from physical acts to verbal and emotional slights and incorporated forms of passive neglect in addition to active aggression.

Haslam described this process as concept creep and argued that “some examples of concept creep are surely the work of deliberate actors who might be called expansion entrepreneurs.”

Concept expansion, Haslam wrote, “can be used as a tactic to amplify the perceived seriousness of a movement’s chosen social problem.” In addition, “such expansion can be effective means of enhancing the perceived seriousness of a social problem or threat by increasing the perceived prevalence of both ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators.’”

Haslam cited studies showing that strong “correlates of holding expansive concepts of harm were compassion-related trait values, left-liberal political attitudes and forms of morality associated with both.” Holding expansive concepts of harm was also “associated with affective and cognitive empathy orientation and most strongly of all with endorsement of harm- and fairness-based morality.” Many of these characteristics are associated with the political left.

“The expansion of harm-related concepts has implications for acceptable self-expression and free speech,” Haslam wrote. “Creeping concepts enlarge the range of expressions judged to be unacceptably harmful, thereby increasing calls for speech restrictions. Expansion of the harm-related concepts of hate and hate speech exemplifies this possibility.”

While much of the commentary on the progressive left has been critical, Haslam takes a more ambivalent position: “Sometimes concept creep is presented in an exclusively negative frame,” he wrote, but that fails to address the “positive implications. To that end, we offer three positive consequences of the phenomenon.”

The first is that expansionary definitions of harm “can be useful in drawing attention to harms previously overlooked. Consider the vertical expansion of abuse to include emotional abuse.”

Second, “concept creep can prevent harmful practices by modifying social norms.” For example, “changing definitions of bullying that include social exclusion and antagonistic acts expressed horizontally rather than only downward in organizational hierarchies may also entrench norms against the commission of destructive behavior.”

And finally:

The expansion of psychology’s negative concepts can motivate interventions aimed at preventing or reducing the harms associated with the newly categorized behaviors. For instance, the conceptual expansion of addiction to include behavioral addictions (e.g., gambling and internet addictions) has prompted a flurry of research into treatment options, which has found that a range of psychosocial treatments can be successfully used to treat gambling, internet and sexual addictions.

Judge suggested an approach to this line of inquiry that he believed might offer a way for liberalism to regain its footing:

I would like to think that there is a version of modern progressivism that accepts many of the premises of the problem and causes of inequality but does so in a way that also celebrates the power of individualism, of consensus and of common cause. I know this is perhaps naïve. But if we give in to cynicism (that consensus can’t be found), that’s self-reinforcing, isn’t it? I think about the progress on how society now views sexual orientation and the success stories. The change was too slow, painful for many, but was there any other way?

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here's our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

Thomas B. Edsall has been a contributor to the Times Opinion section since 2011. His column on strategic and demographic trends in American politics appears every Wednesday. He previously covered politics for The Washington Post. @ edsall