« After a 6-3 SCOTUS vote to vacate stay, Texas completes its sixth execution of 2023 | Main | "Defense Lawyering in the Progressive Prosecution Era" »
October 11, 2023
Sentencing Project releases first in series of reports on the "narrowing and persistence" of racial disparities CJ system
The Sentencing Project has released this new report today titled "One in Five: Ending Racial Inequity in Incarceration." The report's lengthy executive summary provides an overview of the report's these and concludes by nothing this report is the first in a series. Here are excerpts from the start and close of the executive summary:
Following a massive, four-decade-long buildup of incarceration disproportionately impacting people of color, a growing reform movement has made important inroads. The 21st century has witnessed progress both in reducing the U.S. prison population and its racial and ethnic disparities. The total prison population has declined by 25% after reaching its peak level in 2009. While all major racial and ethnic groups experienced decarceration, the Black prison population has downsized the most. The number of imprisoned Black Americans decreased 39% since its peak in 2002. Despite this progress, imprisonment levels remain too high nationwide, particularly for Black Americans.
Reforms to drug law enforcement and to sentencing for drug and property offenses, particularly those impacting urban areas which are disproportionately home to communities of color, have fueled decarceration and narrowed racial disparities. These trends have led scholars to declare a “generational shift” in the lifetime likelihood of imprisonment for Black men. This risk has fallen from a staggering one in three for those born in 1981 to a still troubling one in five for Black men born in 2001. Black women have experienced the sharpest decline in their imprisonment rate, falling by 70% between 2000 and 2021.
But ... progress in reducing racial disparity in the criminal legal system is incomplete and at risk of stalling or being reversed....
To help protect and expand the progress made so far, The Sentencing Project is producing a series of four reports examining both the narrowing and persistence of racial injustice in the criminal legal system, as well as highlighting promising reforms. This first installment presents an overview of trends in prison and jail incarceration and community supervision. The next installment will examine the high levels of contact that police initiate, particularly with people of color, as well as differential crime rates. The final reports will examine key drivers of disparity from within the criminal legal system and promising reforms from dozens of jurisdictions around the country.
October 11, 2023 at 11:48 AM | Permalink
Comments
Notably absent--a discussion of different rates of criminality . . . . and an assurance that race-based lenience won't be used to address the issue.
Posted by: federalist | Oct 11, 2023 12:16:50 PM
Removing racial inequity means taking it into account when creating laws, filing charges, and sentencing. I thought Justice was supposed to be blind?
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Oct 12, 2023 12:46:04 AM
For as long as there are racial disparities in committing crime, there SHOULD be racial disparities in the criminal justice system. This is so for reasons identical to the reasons that, while gender disparities in committing crime continue to exist, comparable gender disparities in the system SHOULD exist. The CJ system is not here to mirror the general population. It's here to mirror the CRIMINAL population, which is significantly different.
This is so self-evident that people pretending not to know it are simply being dishonest.
Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 12, 2023 3:27:18 PM
The Council of Criminal Justice, The Sentencing Project and several like-minded organizations have published studies on the declining incarceration rate of black people. The disparity lies in the sentencing particularly regarding violent crimes. Black men are sentenced to longer prison terms than white men for violent crimes, but causes the disparity. It's not an issue of a "culture of criminality" or some "violent pathology". This disparity could vanish by sentencing reforms such as abolishing mandatory minimum sentencing.
The incarceration rate of black women declined 70% yet conservatives are mum to that fact. I suppose it runs afoul of their beliefs. It's not like every black woman in America told one another, "We're not going to break the law."
Posted by: Anon | Oct 13, 2023 10:28:56 AM
Maybe someone could look at the racial disparity of prosecutions for obstructing Congress/ Jamaal Bowman isn't even gonna be charged. Garland should spend the rest of his miserable life in a federal prison.
Posted by: federalist | Oct 13, 2023 3:00:32 PM
As sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, we observe the expected over-excited knee-jerk response from those seeking to justify and defend America's racist history - and especially the overtly racist CJS. Through every objective standard, every statistical analysis, well-researched and documented social science study, and the literally hundreds of thousands of anecdotal accounts reflecting systemic racism throughout the CJS, the usual suspects that frequent this blog site seek to refute the obvious, and defend the indefensible.
Could these be the same folk who claim that slavery greatly benefitted the slaves, and that the confederate traitors were in fact heroes as they fought to sustain such a noble institution? Or are they the same folks who advocate that being placed in solitary confinement for extended periods of time (even years) is not at all abusive (or racist) as it allows the wrongdoer time to reflect upon their bad deeds,commune with God, achieve penitence, and that they should be profusely thanking their kind but stern over-seers for such golden opportunities?
Posted by: SG | Oct 13, 2023 5:44:28 PM
SG --
"As sure as the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, we observe the expected over-excited knee-jerk response from those seeking to justify and defend America's racist history."
Do you write the stuff for Hamas or do they write your stuff?
Still, I should thank you for conspicuously not refuting a single word I wrote. Blacks are "overrepresented" in prison for the same reason males are and people below 40 are: It's because these groups are overrepresented AMONG THOSE WHO COMMIT CRIME. Why you pretend not to know this, or pretend that the rest of us should ignore it, is a matter of befuddlement.
Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 13, 2023 6:15:34 PM
As a Jew, I take great exception to your 'Hamas' comments. (Totally unnecessary and adolescent). But putting that aside, I noticed that you have failed to provide even one gram of evidence that even slightly refutes my observations. As you are an erudite and educated man, I'm sure you would have included such comments, provided they were well-founded and true. Therefore, in the absence of such evidence, I take your response as a full-throated endorsement of my views. Thank you for agreeing with me.
Posted by: SG | Oct 13, 2023 6:58:16 PM
SG --
I would say that you're profoundly unserious, but I don't think I can justify "profoundly."
Still, you will forever have my gratitude for, some weeks ago, admitting -- nay, proclaiming -- that defense lawyers don't give a hoot about truth (not their department) and are there solely to advance the interest of the client. That was very refreshing, and very useful, candor.
Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 13, 2023 10:51:58 PM
Bill,
It just thrills me no end when you bring up this subject. It gives me yet ANOTHER opportunity to school you on the role of the defense attorney. And not in MY words, but rather in the words of that flaming liberal-activist Supreme Court Justice, Byron White (who dissented on the Miranda decision in 1963, and then in 1973 he dissented on the Roe v Wade decision. A staunch liberal indeed!). I quote Justice White from the case of U.S. v Wade 388 US 218,256 (1967):
"But defense counsel has no comparable obligation to ascertain or present the truth. Our system assigns him a different mission. He must be and is interested in preventing the conviction of the innocent, but, absent a voluntary plea of guilty, we also insist that he defend his client whether he is innocent or guilty. The State has the obligation to present the evidnce. Defense counsel need present nothing, even if he knows what the truth is. He need not furnish any witnesses to the police, or reveal any confidences of his client, or furnish any other information to help the prosecution's case. If he can confuse a witness, even a truthful one, or make him appear at a disadvantage, unsure or indecisive, that will be his normal course".
Okay, Bill. School's out for the day. You may need to go study a bit more as we may spring a suprise quiz on you tomorrow on this very subject.
Posted by: SG | Oct 14, 2023 6:07:52 AM
SG --
I appreciate your confirming yet again that defense counsel have no interest in the truth. Of course, anyone with normal intelligence would see that this makes them a suspect (at best) source when they're holding forth about this or that, but "normal intelligence" might be a tall order for some.
P.S. Still, just so that you can continue my education, could you explain why I should believe someone who has let me know in advance that he has no interest in being truthful?
Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 14, 2023 4:29:48 PM
SG --
A few questions while I'm thinking of it:
1. Do you personally believe you should tell the truth when posting here?
2. As a general matter, do you think disregard of the truth is a good thing?
3. Wouldn't a factually innocent defendant benefit from more truth rather than more deceit?
4. Some of the Hamas barbarians beheaded infants. Do you think it would be unjust to give them the death penalty? I'm not asking whether you think it would be legal; I'm asking if you think it would be unjust.
Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 14, 2023 4:46:32 PM
Bill (if that is your real name):
1. As to Hamas, I would be just as happy to have them wander the desert for the next sixty years of their pitiful lives. And they would be on their own, with just the clothes on their back, nothing else. And not allowed sanctuary anywhere at anytime, if that were feasible. Aleternatively, solitary confinement in a small cell would do just as well. I don't think there's an 8th Amendment in Israel.
2. A factually innocent defendant should not be subjected to the whims of over-zealous prosecutors and deceitful law enforcement agents, who play fast and loose with "the truth".
3. In general, truth is 'better than' (i.e., morally superior) to self-serving and intentional deceit, with rare exception.
4. "Do you personally believe you should tell the truth when posting here?"...and why should I bare my soul to strangers such as 'federalist' or 'Tarls' and the like? This isn't a Catholic 'confessional', is it? There are some things people choose not to share on blog sites, e.g., this site, Facebook, X, Reddit, Instagram, etc. That does not make one less truthful, but just more practical. And guess what? I seriously doubt that you are "always truthful" on here at all times with all people under all circumstances. Agree?
Posted by: SG | Oct 14, 2023 6:51:48 PM
Bill,
You asked:
"Still, just so that you can continue my education, could you explain why I should believe someone who has let me know in advance that he has no interest in being truthful?"
Okay, Bill, class is in:
No one is required to believe anyone at anytime about anything when they post something on a blog site. Where did you get such a notion that one MUST always and only be truthful when engaged in playful banter such as this?
Talk about a naivety! I thought you were far more savvy than this....smh.
Posted by: SG | Oct 14, 2023 7:00:40 PM
SG --
I have to take my hat off to the world record speed with which you run away from your previously ponderous claims as now being mere "playful banter." I wasn't that fast even when I was young.
Posted by: Bill Otis | Oct 14, 2023 9:48:09 PM
Bill
Back-handed compliment accepted. Thank you very much. But I'm nowhere even near your league when it comes to deflection; changing the subject; and the intentional ignoring or mischaracterizations of others' points. You have me beat by a mile.
Posted by: SG | Oct 15, 2023 6:06:55 AM
