The Political Theology of Mass Incarceration

2020 ◽  
pp. 65-104
Author(s):  
Joshua Dubler ◽  
Vincent W. Lloyd

Chapter 2 tracks the way American political elites talked about justice and punishment before and during the rise of mass incarceration. The authors show how these concepts were once closely connected with the religious imagination. When that link was severed, justice was reduced to the proper functioning of the law, to a criminal justice system, and a new set of ideas and institutions promoting law and order and victims’ rights took over. The chapter demonstrates how, at the level of political rhetoric, religion—along with economics and race—was essential for promoting incarceration as the sole mechanism for effecting justice.

Author(s):  
Cheryl Allsop

This chapter considers the development of, and growing interest in, cold case reviews, distinguishing between the instrumental and symbolic politics which surround their development. What becomes clear in this chapter is that the rise in interest can be attributed to a number of individual and interlocking events, including changes in police legitimacy, the introduction of a number of police reforms, and initiatives resulting in changes to police practices, pressure from victims’ rights groups for more attention from the criminal justice system, and advances in scientific techniques and technologies with increasing uses found for them. The chapter briefly considers the political background to cold case reviews, and how this connects with the broader politics of policing along with the instrumental politics of maintaining major crime review teams and the symbolic politics which helps to justify expenditure in cold case reviews.


Outlaw Women ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 217-232
Author(s):  
Susan Dewey ◽  
Bonnie Zare ◽  
Catherine Connolly ◽  
Rhett Epler ◽  
Rosemary Bratton

Our Wyoming study offers direct implications for the U.S. prison system, which has reached a new frontier in terms of the sheer number of people incarcerated, on probation or parole, or experiencing the lifelong consequences of a felony conviction. Much like the frontier myth that continues to exercise influence in U.S. politics and dominant culture, mass incarceration is the result of popular acceptance of beliefs that ignore pervasive socioeconomic inequalities. These beliefs encourage the U.S. voting public to endorse addressing deeply rooted social problems, particularly addiction, through criminal justice solutions designed by the politicians they elect. Such is the nature of democracy in a society characterized by ever-widening inequalities between rich and poor, those with stable jobs and contingent workers, where the criminal justice system is fodder for countless films, series, and other entertainment, and where individuals rely far more on electronic communication than on meaningful social interaction. Social isolation and inequality breed fear, and three fear-based beliefs undergird the existence of the criminal justice system in its present form: drug-abusing women are a threat to public safety, law breaking is an individual choice rather than a community problem, and women released from prison pose a long-term risk to society.


Author(s):  
Heather Hamill

This chapter argues that, from the early days of the political conflict in the 1970s the conditions were such that the Irish Republican Army (IRA) adopted some of the functions of the state, namely the provision of policing and punishment of ordinary crime. The hostility of the statutory criminal justice system, particularly the police, toward the working-class Catholic community dramatically increased the costs of using state services. The high levels of disaffection and aggression among working-class Catholics toward the police meant that the state could no longer fulfill its function and police the community in any “normal” way. A demand for policing therefore existed. Simultaneously, this demand was met and fostered by the IRA, which had the motivation, the manpower, and the monopoly on the use of violence necessary to carry out this role.


Author(s):  
Stuart Don

This chapter analyses the pervasive impact of the Charter on the Canadian criminal justice system. Active judicial interpretation of Charter rights has put in place distinctive constitutional standards of substantive law, including those of fault, and struck down oppressive laws for arbitrariness and overbreadth. Also examined are new standards for police powers to stop, search, detain and interrogate, fair trial rights such as the duty of full Crown disclosure, and for assessing mandatory minimum sentences. This chapter describes and welcomes a robust exclusionary discretion for evidence obtained in violation of the Charter. It is suggested that the Canadian Charter standards are no panacea and are sometimes too weak but that they have often provided a welcome balance to the expedient lure of law-and-order politics.


Author(s):  
Aliya Saperstein ◽  
Andrew M. Penner ◽  
Jessica M. Kizer

Recent research on how contact with the criminal justice system shapes racial perceptions in the United States has shown that incarceration increases the likelihood that people are racially classified by others as black, and decreases the likelihood that they are classified as white. We extend this work, using longitudinal data with information on whether respondents have been arrested, convicted, or incarcerated, and details about their most recent arrest. This allows us to ask whether any contact with the criminal justice system triggers racialization, or only certain types of contact. Additional racial categories allow us to explore the racialization of crime beyond the black-white divide. Results indicate even one arrest significantly increases the odds of subsequently being classified as black, and decreases the odds of being classified as white or Asian. This implies a broader impact of increased policing and mass incarceration on racialization and stereotyping, with consequences for social interactions, political attitudes, and research on inequality.


Author(s):  
Brett Curry ◽  
Banks Miller

The pervasiveness of their influence arguably makes prosecutors the most consequential actors in the American criminal justice system. Armed with discretion over which cases to pursue, what charges to file, and which issue areas to prioritize, prosecutors play a decisive role in determining what progresses from investigation to the courtroom. It is their charge to do justice in each case, but that obligation hardly forecloses the influence of politics on their decisions. Despite their centrality, however, prosecutors and their behavior have failed to garner even a fraction of the attention that scholars have directed toward law enforcement, correctional systems, or judges. The discretion of American prosecutors is theoretically immense; there are few formal constraints upon it. If a federal or state prosecutor declines to pursue a case that has been referred to him or her, that declination decision is essentially immune from judicial review. But these formalisms come with more practical limitations. At the federal level, United States Attorneys are appointed by the president and, therefore, are expected to carry out an administration’s general policy priorities. In the states, most district attorneys answer to the electorate, which imposes its own constraints on a prosecutor’s freedom of action. Chief prosecutors—state and federal—are simultaneously principals to their subordinates and agents of the people or the president. If those considerations were not enough, American prosecutors must be mindful of still other factors. How might their actions today impact their future career paths? What influence might legislative changes, public opinion, or judicial rulings have on how they operate? Scholarship on prosecutors has addressed some of these questions, but we still lack a good understanding of all the ways in which politics infects prosecutorial decision-making. As “progressive prosecutors”—many who are former public defenders—continue to win office, new questions will arise about how far prosecutors can push reform of the criminal justice system. A major looming question is how voters conditioned to law-and-order rhetoric will evaluate the new prosecutors. Some preliminary work shows that non-White prosecutors tend to reduce rates of incarceration, while Republican-affiliated prosecutors increase them.


Author(s):  
Stephen Farrall ◽  
Will Jennings

This chapter explores the Thatcherite legacy for crime and the criminal justice system. We argue that, despite much of Thatcher’s rhetoric on ‘law and order’, most criminal justice activity during her period in office was essentially liberal (that is, progressive) in nature. Nevertheless, the social and economic policies pursued in the early to mid-1980s were, we argue, associated with rises in the crime rate, which in turn shifted public attitudes towards crime and the treatment of offenders. Coupled with the Labour party’s shift rightwards from the early 1990s and Blair’s focus on crime as a topic Labour ‘owned’ meant that both the Conservative and Labour parties were engaged in a crime ‘arms race’ towards policies which were in tune with the Thatcherite instinct on crime.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 446
Author(s):  
Lisa Servon ◽  
Ava Esquier ◽  
Gillian Tiley

(1) The increase in women’s mass incarceration over the past forty years raises questions about how justice-involved women experience the financial aspects of the criminal justice system. (2) We conducted in-depth interviews with twenty justice-involved women and seven criminal law and reentry professionals, and conducted courtroom observations in southeastern Pennsylvania. (3) The results from this exploratory research reveal that women’s roles as caregivers, their greater health needs, and higher likelihood of being poor creates barriers to paying fines and fees and exacerbates challenges in reentry. (4) These challenges contribute to a cycle of prolonged justice involvement and financial instability.


2018 ◽  
pp. 136-161
Author(s):  
Insa Lee Koch

Chapter 5 looks at how housing estate residents interact with the police in negotiating the dangers of ‘the street’. Government policies that go tough on ‘law and order’ have focused on young people’s involvement in street-based activities, invoking a language of ‘gang crime’ and ‘gang membership’. However, this language does not easily fit with residents’ own understanding of the dangers of the ‘streets’ that encompasses both the threat of daily victimization and the failures of the criminal justice system. This chapter argues that the daily threat of serious crime alongside mistrust in the police generates seemingly contradictory responses. Residents sometimes appropriate the police as personalized tools into everyday disputes with friends, kin, and neighbours. Meanwhile, in situations of more serious threat, they tend to fall back onto informal mechanisms of policing that the state outlaws as vigilante violence. It is precisely this gap between citizens’ expectations for support and the reality of police performance that is expressed when residents show support for harsher punishment in a system that has become ‘too liberal’ and ‘soft’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document