« New Michigan law adds to number of states requiring registered sex offenders to pay yearly fee | Main | Is it "misleading to compare marijuana to beer"? »

November 7, 2013

"Free at Last? Judicial Discretion and Racial Disparities in Federal Sentencing"

The title of this post is the title of this notable new paper by Crystal Yang now available via SSRN. Here is the abstract:

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines were created to reduce unwarranted sentencing disparities among similar defendants.  This paper explores the impact of increased judicial discretion on racial disparities in sentencing after the Guidelines were struck down in United States v. Booker (2005).  Using data on the universe of federal defendants, I find that black defendants are sentenced to almost two months more in prison compared to their white counterparts after Booker, a 4% increase in average sentence length.  To identify the sources of racial disparities, I construct a dataset linking judges to over 400,000 defendants.  Exploiting the random assignment of cases to judges, I find that racial disparities are greater among judges appointed after Booker, suggesting acculturation to the Guidelines by judges with experience sentencing under mandatory regime. Prosecutors also respond to increased judicial discretion by charging black defendants with longer mandatory minimums.

I am always interested in sophisticated analyses of the post-Booker sentencing system, so I am looking forward to finding time to review this article closely. But, as with lots of "disparity" sentencing scholarship, I worry that this article is among those spending lots of time worrying about and trying to figure out whose sentences may be longer after Booker rather than worrying about and trying to figure out if all sentence remain way too long in the federal sentencing system.

November 7, 2013 at 12:08 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e2019b00c6d6e9970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Free at Last? Judicial Discretion and Racial Disparities in Federal Sentencing":

Comments

Wouldn't a claim that black defendants are charged with offenses carrying mandatory minimums at a higher rate and that the disparity is somehow unwarranted require an examination of the underlying facts of each of those 400,000 cases? The idea that all populations commit all crimes at the same rates seems like something that would need to be demonstrated rather than simply assumed.

I am specifically looking at the statement about prosecutorial discretion here.

Posted by: Soronel Haetir | Nov 7, 2013 1:55:34 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB