Inter-Party Competition, Public Electoral Pressure, and Democratic Strength: Refining Political Explanations of Incarceration Trends in the U.S., 1980 – 2010

The purpose of this research is to advance the politics of mass imprisonment literature by testing and specifying the macro-explanations of the state-level incarceration change in the United States (U.S.) between 1980 and 2010. Specifically, I account for mechanisms of inter-party competition and public electoral pressure neglected in prior research. To accomplish this goal, I utilize random coefficient models designed to control for repeated annual measures of state-level data that overwhelm traditional analytic techniques. Findings suggest that violent crime, partisan affiliation of state legislators and governors, probation rates, citizen ideology, marijuana decriminalization, and recidivist-focused laws are associated with incarceration as hypothesized, as well as the African American presence net of crime and socioeconomic disadvantage. Contributing to the theoretical debates on democracy and punishment, this paper demonstrates that inter-party competition and public electoral pressure amplify incarceration in the context of Democratic Party dominance, where no liberalizing effects of competition were found. I conclude that legal and extralegal factors are associated with incarceration and suggest that the public did not oppose criminal justice expansion via democratic feedback mechanisms, so both penal populism (Pratt, 2008) and popular punitivism (Campbell et al., 2017) are valid interpretations of imprisonment politics during the analyzed period.

Federalism Before Trump

This chapter begins by explaining the roots of federalism in the American constitutional system: where it comes from historically and why it exists today. It also explores how northern states relied on federalism mechanisms and principles to oppose the expansion of slavery in antebellum America and how progressives more recently have used federalism to encourage state experimentation with progressive policies, such as marriage equality and marijuana decriminalization, as a way of promoting their eventual national implementation. At the same time, the chapter acknowledges that federalism in American history has been frequently deployed to promote racist and reactionary policies. This mixed record supports the chapter’s thesis that federalism is a substantively neutral principle that has sometimes been used for good and sometimes for ill. Federalism, in other words, is about which level of government (federal or state or both) should make which types of policy decisions rather than about the policies’ substantive content. As such, federalism is a neutral principle of governance that can and should be separated from the pursuit of particular policy objectives.

Child and adolescent psychiatry

Ethical dilemmas unique to child and adolescent psychiatry are consequences of the child psychiatrist’s duty to serve as advocate for child patients while simultaneously having professional responsibilities to the parents and guardians of the children, as well as to child-related institutions inclusive of schools, juvenile justice systems, and childcare agencies. In addition, awareness of developmental differences is paramount, as continuous maturation occurs from ages zero through eighteen years and beyond. With this in mind, the chapter first reviews ethical principles and reasoning and the influence of context on such ever-present matters as assent/consent/dissent, agency, assessment, treatments, and confidentiality, and then hones in on current and future dilemmas posed by the needs of transitional age youth and the impacts of social media, marijuana decriminalization, alternative sexual and gender expressions, minority vulnerabilities, and casualties of global conflicts. A separate section focuses on ethical considerations relevant to research performed with child subjects.

Physical Harm Reduction in Domestic Violence: Does Marijuana Make Assaults Safer?

Studies on the effect of marijuana on domestic violence often suffer from endogeneity issues. To examine the effect of marijuana decriminalization and medical marijuana legalization on serious domestic assaults, we conducted a difference-in-differences analysis on a panel dataset on NIBRS-reported assaults in 24 states over the 12 years between 2005 and 2016. Assaults disaggregated according to situation and extent of injury were employed as dependent variables. We found that while the total number of assaults did not change, decriminalization reduced domestic assaults involving serious injuries by 18%. From a harm reduction perspective, these results suggest that while the extensive margin of violence did not change, the intensive margin measured by the seriousness of assaults were substantially affected by decriminalization. This result may be partially explained by reductions in offender alcohol intoxication and weapon-involved assault.

Marijuana Decriminalization, Medical Marijuana Laws, and Fatal Traffic Crashes in US Cities, 2010–2017

Objectives. To determine the impact of city-level cannabis decriminalization and medical marijuana laws (MMLs) on fatal traffic crashes in US cities. Methods. Using a census of fatal traffic crashes from the 2010 to 2017 Fatality Analysis Reporting System, we examined MMLs and cannabis decriminalization on fatal crashes by age and sex of driver. We used a Poisson difference-in-differences approach, exploiting temporal and geographic variation in marijuana decriminalization laws. Results. Cities experienced a 13% increase in fatal crashes involving 15- to 24-year-old male drivers following decriminalization (incidence rate ratio = 1.125; 95% confidence interval = 1.014, 1.249). This effect was immediate and strongest on weekend nights. We found no effect on female drivers or older males. Conversely, we found that MMLs were associated with fewer fatal crashes for both males and females, which was most pronounced in 15- to 24-year-old drivers. Conclusions. Unlike MMLs, which are associated with fewer fatal crashes, cities experienced a relative increase in fatal crashes involving young male drivers following marijuana decriminalization. Public Health Implications. MMLs stipulate consumption occurs at home, whereas decriminalization only lessens the penalty for marijuana possession. Therefore, travel incentives of such laws have heterogeneous effects on traffic safety.

The impact of decriminalization on marijuana and alcohol consumption in Jamaica

We examine whether marijuana decriminalization in Jamaica, a country that historically has had relatively widespread use of the drug, has led to an increase in its use, the frequency of use and the money spent on it. To this end, we use a national drug survey dataset with extensive information on people’s use of, attitudes towards, access to marijuana. Our econometric analysis shows that awareness of the legislation has a positive correlation with the use of the substance. Worryingly, decriminalization positively correlates with the likelihood of first time and general use for youths. There is also some evidence that the legislation results in a substitution away from alcohol towards marijuana consumption for youths. From a policy perspective, a marijuana monitoring system can be implemented to follow the consumption patterns of youths. This should involve establishing school-level programmes that monitor students, and where potential drug users are identified, school officials should intervene to curb students’ drug appetite before an escalated use of marijuana.

Medical Marijuana and Crime: Substance Use and Criminal Behaviors in a Sample of Arrestees

After decades of prohibition, laws allowing marijuana use for medical and, in some cases, recreational purposes have been enacted across the country. To date, however, little is known about medical marijuana use, particularly regarding its relationship to criminal offending and use by nonauthorized persons. The current study bridges this gap by examining offending patterns in a sample of recent arrestees in Maricopa County, Arizona, identified and interviewed through the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN) project. Findings suggest that medical users had a higher probability for committing Driving Under the Influendce (DUI) and drug selling/making than nonusers, and diverted medical marijuana users had a higher probability for involvement in property crime, violent crime, DUI, and drug selling/making than nonusers. The results have important implications for developing marijuana decriminalization policies, criminal justice, and criminological theory. Directions for future research are discussed.