Book contents
- The Legal Process and the Promise of Justice
- Cambridge Studies in Law and Society
- The Legal Process and the Promise of Justice
- Copyright page
- Contents
- About the Contributors
- Introduction: Past as Prologue
- Part I The Process Is the Punishment
- Part II Court Reform on Trial
- Part III Judicial Policymaking and the Modern State
- 10 Judicial Deference in the Modern State
- 11 The Law of the Workplace
- 12 Administrative “States” of Judicial Policy on Gender-Motivated Violence
- 13 Can Courts Abolish Mass Incarceration?
- 14 Policy-Making by Out-of-Court Settlements: Palestinian Informers at the Israeli High Court of Justice
- Part IV Political Liberalism and the Legal Complex
- Index
- Books in the Series
- References
13 - Can Courts Abolish Mass Incarceration?
from Part III - Judicial Policymaking and the Modern State
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 April 2019
Book contents
- The Legal Process and the Promise of Justice
- Cambridge Studies in Law and Society
- The Legal Process and the Promise of Justice
- Copyright page
- Contents
- About the Contributors
- Introduction: Past as Prologue
- Part I The Process Is the Punishment
- Part II Court Reform on Trial
- Part III Judicial Policymaking and the Modern State
- 10 Judicial Deference in the Modern State
- 11 The Law of the Workplace
- 12 Administrative “States” of Judicial Policy on Gender-Motivated Violence
- 13 Can Courts Abolish Mass Incarceration?
- 14 Policy-Making by Out-of-Court Settlements: Palestinian Informers at the Israeli High Court of Justice
- Part IV Political Liberalism and the Legal Complex
- Index
- Books in the Series
- References
Summary
The extraordinary growth in American prison populations from the late 1970s through the first decade of the twenty-first century has largely ended, and calls for reversing mass incarceration, as it has come to be known, abound from all sides. Yet as of this writing progress toward “decarceration” remains unsteady, and the likelihood of a systematic national decarceration effort led by the federal government has declined in the transition from the Obama to the Trump administration (Gottschalk 2015).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Legal Process and the Promise of JusticeStudies Inspired by the Work of Malcolm Feeley, pp. 259 - 272Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
References
Alexander, Michelle. 2010. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M. and Rubin, Edward L.. 1998. Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State: How the Courts Reformed America’s Prisons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M. and Simon, Jonathan. 1992. “The New Penology: Notes on the Emerging Strategy of Corrections and Its Implications.” Criminology 30 (4): 449–74.Google Scholar
Fleury-Steiner, Benjamin and Longazel, Jamie G.. 2013. The Pains of Mass Imprisonment. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, Marie. 2015. Caught: The Prison State and the Lockdown of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Guetzkow, Joshua and Schoon, Eric. 2015. “If You Build It, They Will Fill It: The Consequences of Prison Overcrowding Litigation.” Law & Society Review 49 (2): 401–32.Google Scholar
Haney, Craig. 2006. Reforming Punishment: Psychological Limits to the Pains of Imprisonment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Johal, Kiira J. 2014. “Note: Judges Behind Bars, the Intrusiveness Requirement’s Restrictions on the Implementation of Relief under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.” Columbia Law Review 114: 715–44.Google Scholar
Lynch, Mona. 2009. Sunbelt Justice: Arizona and the Transformation of American Punishment. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Reiter, Keramet. 2016. 23/7: Pelican Bay and the Rise of Longterm Solitary Confinement. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Rubin, Edward L. 2001. “The Inevitability of Rehabilitation.” Law & Inequality 19: 343–77.Google Scholar
Schlanger, Margo. 2006. “Civil Rights Injunctions over Time: A Case Study of Jail and Prison Court Orders.” New York University Law Review 81: 550–630.Google Scholar
Schlanger, Margo. 2015. “Trends in Prisoner Litigation as the PLRA Enters Adulthood.” University of California Irvine Law Review 5: 154–78.Google Scholar
Schoenfeld, Heather. 2010. “Mass Incarceration and the Paradox of Prison Conditions Litigation.” Law & Society Review 44 (3–4): 731–68.Google Scholar
Simon, Jonathan. 2014. Mass Incarceration on Trial: A Remarkable Court Decision and the Future of American Prisons. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
Simon, Jonathan. 2014b. “An Unenviable Task: How Federal Courts Legitimized Mass Incarceration,” in Legitimacy and Criminal Justice: An International Exploration, edited by Tankebe, Justice and Liebling, Alison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 227–46.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Kyle T. 2013. “To Free or Not to Free: Rethinking Release Orders under the Prison Litigation Reform Act after Brown v. Plata.” Boston College Journal of Law & Social Justice 33 (2): 419–51.Google Scholar
van Zyl Smit, Dirk and Snacken, Sonja. 2009. Principles of European Prison Law and Policy: Penology and Human Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Western, Bruce. 2006. Punishment and Inequality in America. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Zimring, Franklin E. and Hawkins, Gordon J.. 1993. The Scale of Imprisonment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Zimring, Franklin and Hawkins, Gordon. 1995. Incapacitation: Penal Confinement and the Restraint of Crime. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cases
Braggs v. Dunn, United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, Civil Action No. 2:14cv601-MHT (WO), June 17, 2017
Brown v. Plata (2011) 563 U.S. 493, 131 S.Ct. 1910
Holt v. Sarver (1969) 300 F.Supp. 825 District Court for the District of Arkansas
Trop v. Dulles (1958) 356 U.S. 86
- 2
- Cited by