Legitimacy, trust and legal cynicism: a review of concepts

We review the concepts of legitimacy, trust, and legal cynicism in the context the debate about police legitimacy, discuss the extent to which these concepts relate to each other, and offer some early, speculative thoughts on a how relational model of legitimacy can extend beyond procedural justice concerns. Relying upon procedural justice theory, we emphasise the distinction between police legitimacy and legitimation: popular legitimacy is defined as public beliefs that legal authority has the right to rule (people acknowledge the oral appropriateness of legal authority) and the authority to govern (people recognise legal authority as the rightful authority), whereas legitimation is related to the criteria people use to judge the normative appropriateness of legal agents’ exercise of power (e.g., the extent to which police officers are trustworthy to behave in accordance with people’s normative expectations). Building on studies on legal cynicism and legal socialisation, we consider how other aspects of police conduct can send negative relational messages about people’s value within society and undermine their judgements about the legitimacy of legal authority – messages of oppression, marginalisation, and neglect over the life course. We conclude suggesting avenues for future research on public-police relations.

How Civility Matters in Civil Matters: Procedural Justice and Court Legitimacy in the Midst of a Legitimacy Crisis

The procedural justice thesis that quality of treatment matters more than outcomes in people’s perception of institutional legitimacy is supported by a large body of research. But studies also suggest that distributive justice and the effectiveness of authorities are more important in certain legal settings (civil courts) and national contexts (posttransition societies). This study tests these ideas through a survey of 192 civil litigants in Poland, a postcommunist country where the national judiciary has recently been subject to intense political scrutiny. Our findings support the generalizability of procedural justice, and especially voice, but also demonstrate the significance of outcomes and legal cynicism. We also discuss prior court contact, role (plaintiff versus defendants), and representation (presence of counsel) as potential moderators on litigants’ perceptions of court legitimacy.

Legitimacy, trust and legal cynicism: A review of concepts

We review the concepts of legitimacy, trust, and legal cynicism in the context the debate about police legitimacy, discuss the extent to which these concepts relate to each other, and offer some early, speculative thoughts on a how relational model of legitimacy can extend beyond procedural justice concerns. Relying upon procedural justice theory, we emphasise the distinction between police legitimacy and legitimation: popular legitimacy is defined as public beliefs that legal authority has the right to rule (people acknowledge the moral appropriateness of legal authority) and the authority to govern (people recognise legal authority as the rightful authority), whereas legitimation is related to the criteria people use to judge the normative appropriateness of legal agents’ exercise of power (e.g., the extent to which police officers are trustworthy to behave in accordance with people’s normative expectations). Building on studies on legal cynicism and legal socialisation, we consider how other aspects of police conduct can send negative relational messages about people’s value within society and undermine their judgements about the legitimacy of legal authority – messages of oppression, marginalisation, and neglect over the life course. We conclude suggesting avenues for future research on public-police relations.

RACIST TORTURE AND THE CODE OF SILENCE

We join Eduardo Bonilla-Silva’s structural theory of the racialized U.S. social system with a situational methodology developed by Arthur L. Stinchcombe and Irving Goffman to analyze how law works as a mechanism that connects formal legal equality with legal cynicism. The data for this analysis come from the trial of a Chicago police detective, Jon Burge, who as leader of an infamous torture squad escaped criminal charges for more than thirty years. Burge was finally charged with perjury and obstruction of justice, charges that obscured and perpetuated the larger structural reality of a code of silence that enabled racist torture of more than a hundred Black men. This case study demonstrates how the non-transparency of courtroom sidebars plays an important role in perpetuating systemic features of American criminal injustice: a code of silence, racist discrimination, and legal cynicism.

Police-involved deaths and the impact on homicide rates in the post-Ferguson era: a study of 44 US cities

This study investigated whether in the post-Ferguson era, homicide rates increased in cities where there was a protested police-involved death. It also tests for evidence of two potential mechanisms: 1) legal cynicism, measured as an increase in homicides (where reporting is less discretionary) that is larger than aggravated assaults (where reporting is more discretionary), which would suggest reduced reporting; and 2) the moderating influence of an external investigation as an indicator of de-policing. Homicide and assault trends in 44 US cities with a police-involved protest were analysed using an interrupted time series design. Results were combined using a meta-analysis, and moderators were tested in meta-regressions. Averaged across all cities, there was an acute and sustained 25.7% increase in the homicide rate (99% CI: 15.0% to 36.4%). Aggravated assault rates also increased above baseline, though it was 15.1 percentage points smaller than homicide rate effects (99% CI: -26.6% to -3.6%). Whether the police-involved death was investigated by an external organisation had no detectable effect (p = 0.089). The findings suggest that protested deaths at the hands of police caused increases in both legal cynicism and violence within the communities they are meant to protect.

What the Study of Legal Cynicism and Crime Can Tell Us About Reliability, Validity, and Versatility in Law and Social Science Research

We call for a further appreciation of the versatility of concepts and methods that increase the breadth and diversity of work on law and social science. We make our point with a review of legal cynicism. Legal cynicism's value, like other important concepts, lies in its versatility as well as its capacity for replication. Several classic works introduced legal cynicism, but Sampson & Bartusch named it. Kirk & Papachristos used a cultural framework to broaden it and added essential measures of perceived unresponsiveness and incapacity of police to ensure neighborhood safety and security. A structural theory of legal cynicism explains minority residents’ skepticism of, and desperate reliance on, police in the absence of alternative sources of safety. Historical and ethnographic studies play especially important roles in broadening the versatility of legal cynicism for the study of crime and responses to it.