Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T09:39:02.267Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - Critic

The Limits of Procedural Justice

from Part II - Procedural Justice Policing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2019

David Weisburd
Affiliation:
George Mason University, Virginia
Anthony A. Braga
Affiliation:
Northeastern University, Boston
Get access

Summary

Police are society’s last resort. We grant them broad authority to force solutions on urgent problems when less coercive tactics have failed. We always hope they will be able to resolve those problems peacefully; the whole point of concentrating the authority to use force in a single institution is to professionalize it – to ensure that it will be used less intensively and more responsibly than it otherwise would be (Bittner, 1990: 257ff.). But even when police successfully resolve an emergency without resorting to overt coercion, the covert threat of doing so if “voluntary” compliance fails always lies in the background.

Type
Chapter
Information
Police Innovation
Contrasting Perspectives
, pp. 95 - 118
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ACLU of Illinois (2015). Stop and Frisk in Chicago.Google Scholar
Baker, A. (2010). Selling the “Stop” in “Stop and Frisk,” The New York Times, Sept. 16, 2010.Google Scholar
Beetham, D. (1991). The Legitimation of Power. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bell, M. (2017) Police reform & the dismantling of legal estrangement. Yale Law Journal, 126, 20542150.Google Scholar
Bittner, E. (1990). Aspects of Police Work. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Butler, P. (2010). Let’s Get Free: A Hip Hop Theory of Justice. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Butler, P. (2017). Chokehold: Policing Black Men. New York, The New Press.Google Scholar
Cartwright, N., & Hardie, J. (2012). Evidence-Based Policy: Doing It Better. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cera, J., & Coleman, A. (n.d.). City of Milwaukee Citizen Satisfaction Survey, Center for Urban Initiatives and Research.Google Scholar
Cohen, J., & Sabel, C. (1997). Directly deliberative polyarchy. European Law Journal, 3, 313342.Google Scholar
Davis, K. C. (1975). Police Discretion. St. Paul: West Publishing.Google Scholar
Davis v. New York, 10 Civ. 0699 (S.D.N.Y.) (SAS) (2015). Stipulation of Settlement and Order.Google Scholar
Dorf, M., & Sabel, C. (1998). A constitution of democratic experimentalism. Colombia Law Review, 98, 267473.Google Scholar
Epp, C., Maynard-Moody, S., & Haider-Markel, D. (2014). Pulled Over: How Police Stops Define Race and Citizenship. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, C. (2014). Legitimacy and Procedural Justice: The New Orleans Case Study. Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.Google Scholar
Friedman, B. (2017). Unwarranted: Policing without Permission. New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux.Google Scholar
Futterman, C., Hunt, C., & Kalven, J. (2016). Youth/police encounters on Chicago’s South Side: Acknowledging the realities. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 2016, 125211.Google Scholar
Gilbert, D., Wakeling, S., & Crandall, V. (2015). Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy: Using Training as a Foundation for Strengthening Police-Community Relationships. Oakland: California Partnership for Safe Communities.Google Scholar
Goldstein, H. (1967). Police policy formulation: A proposal for improving police performance. Michigan Law Review, 65, 1123–46.Google Scholar
Gould, J., & Mastrofski, S. (2004) Suspect searches: Assessing police behavior. Criminology & Public Policy, 3, 315362.Google Scholar
Hager, E. (2017). The seismic change in police interrogations. The Marshall Project, March 7, 2017.Google Scholar
Harmon, R. (2012). The problem of policing. Michigan Law Review, 110, 768818.Google Scholar
Harmon, R. (2016). Why arrest? Michigan Law Review, 115, 307–64.Google Scholar
Ignatieff, M. (1979). Police and the people: The birth of Mr. Peel’s “Blue Locusts.” New Society, 443446.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux.Google Scholar
Kelling, G. (1999). Broken Windows and Police Discretion. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. (2008). Deterrence and Crime Prevention. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
King, M. L. Jr. (1964). Letter from a Birmingham Jail. In Why We Can’t Wait. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Klockars, C. (1988). The rhetoric of community policing. In Greene, J. & Mastrofski, S. (eds.), Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality (pp. 239258). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Klockars, C. (1996). A theory of excessive force and its control. In Geller, W. & Toch, H. (eds.), Police Violence: Understanding and Controlling Police Abuse of Force (pp. 122). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Kunard, L., & Moe, C. (2015). Procedural Justice for Law Enforcement: An Overview. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
Lachman, P., La Vigne, N., & Matthews, A. (2012). Examining law enforcement use of pedestrian stops and searches. In La Vigne, N., Lachman, P., Matthews, A., & Neusteter, S. R. (eds.), Key Issues in the Police Use of Pedestrian Stops and Searches (pp. 111). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Larmore, C. (1987). Patterns of Moral Complexity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lind, A., & Tyler, T. (1988). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
MacQueen, S., & Bradford, B. (2015). Enhancing public trust and police legitimacy during road traffic encounters: Results from a randomized controlled trial in Scotland. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 419443.Google Scholar
Mastrofski, S., Snipes, J., & Supina, A. (1996). Compliance on demand: The public’s response to specific police requests. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 33, 269305.Google Scholar
Mazerolle, L., Antrobus, E., Bennett, S., & Tyler, T. (2013). Shaping citizen perceptions of police legitimacy: A randomized field trial of procedural justice. Criminology, 51, 3363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, G. (2012). Using stop and frisk powers responsibly. In La Vigne, N., Lachman, P., Matthews, A., & Neusteter, S. R. (eds.), Key Issues in the Police Use of Pedestrian Stops and Searches (pp. 3743). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
Meares, T. (2015). Rightful Policing. New Perspectives in Policing Bulletin. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, 2015.Google Scholar
Meares, T., Tyler, T., & Gardener, J. (2015). Lawful or fair? How cops and laypeople perceive good policing. Journal of Criminology and Criminal Law, 105, 297344.Google Scholar
Meares, T. (2017). This land is my land? Harvard Law Review, 130, 18771900.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1859/1978). On Liberty. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Miller, E. (2016). Encountering resistance: Contesting policing and procedural justice, University Chicago Legal Forum, 2016, 295368.Google Scholar
Miller, W. (1977). Cops and Bobbies: Police Authority in New York and London, 1830–1870. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Miller, W. (1991). Revenuers and Moonshiners: Enforcing Federal Liquor Law in the Mountain South, 1865–1900. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Milwaukee Police. (2017). Milwaukee Police Chief Refutes Claims Made in Lawsuit, Feb. 22, www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mVHfR-aF70&feature=youtu.be.Google Scholar
Nagin, D., & Telep, C. (2017). Procedural justice and legal compliance. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 528.Google Scholar
Palmer, S. (1988). Police and Protest in England and Ireland, 1780–1850. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Phippen, J. W. (2016). What’s wrong with the police department in Calexico, California? The Atlantic, May 19.Google Scholar
Pitkin, H. (1973). Wittgenstein and Justice. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. (2015). Final Report of the President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.Google Scholar
Ramos, E. (2013). Poor data keeps Chicago’s stop and frisk hidden from scrutiny, WBEZ News, September 12, 2013.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (1993). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Rein, M., & Winship, C. (1999). The dangers of strong causal reasoning. Society, 36, 3846.Google Scholar
Reisig, M., Bratton, J., & Gertz, M. (2007). The construct validity and refinement of process-based policing measures. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34, 10051028.Google Scholar
Reith, C. (1943). The British Police and the Democratic Ideal. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schauer, F. (2015). The Force of Law. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Schulhofer, S., Tyler, T., & Huq, A. (2011). American policing at a crossroads: Unsustainable policies and the procedural justice alternative. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 101, 335374.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. (1992). The Moral Commonwealth. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Skogan, W. (2017). Stop-and-frisk and trust in police in Chicago. In Oberwittler, D. & Roché, S. (eds.), Police-Citizen Relations: A Comparative Investigation of Sources and Impediments of Legitimacy around the World (pp. 247265). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Skogan, W. (2017). La méthode du « stop-and-frisk » en tant que stratégie organisationnelle : leçons tirées à partir des exemples des villes de New York et Chicago. Stop and frisk as an organizational strategy: Lessons from New York and Chicago. Cahiers de la Sécurité et de la Justice, 40, 5462.Google Scholar
Skogan, W., Van Craen, M., & Hennessy, C. (2015). Training police for procedural justice. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 11, 319334.Google Scholar
Storch, R. (1975). The plague of blue locusts: Police reform and popular resistance in Northern England, 1840–57. International Review of Social History, 20, 6190.Google Scholar
Sunshine, J., & Tyler, T. (2003). The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law and Society Review, 37, 513548.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. (1995). Incompletely theorized agreements. Harvard Law Review, 108, 17331772.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. (2016). The Ethics of Influence. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tankebe, J. (2009). Public Cooperation with the Police in Ghana: Does Procedural Fairness Matter? Criminology, 47, 12651293.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. 2004. Order maintenance reconsidered. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 94, 381414.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. (2015a). Olmsted’s police. Law and History Review, 33, 577620.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. (2015b). Perils of value neutrality. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 44, 317352.Google Scholar
Thacher, D. (2016). Channeling police discretion: The hidden potential of focused deterrence. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 2016, 533578.Google Scholar
Tyler, T.(2000). Multiculturalism and the willingness of citizens to defer to law and to legal authorities. Law and Social Inquiry, 25, 9831019.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. (2006). Why People Obey the Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., ed. (2007). Legitimacy and Criminal Justice: An International Perspective. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. (2014). What are legitimacy and procedural justice in policing? and why are they becoming key elements of police leadership? In Fischer, C. (ed.), Legitimacy and Procedural Justice: A New Element of Police Leadership. Washington: US Department of Justice.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. (2016). Understanding the force of law, Tulsa Law Review, 51, 507519.Google Scholar
Tyler, T. (2017). Procedural justice and policing: A rush to judgment?, Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 13, 2953.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., & Blader, S. (2000). Cooperation in Groups. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., & Huo, Y. (2002). Trust in the Law. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Tyler, T., Fagan, J., & Geller, A. (2014). Street stops and police legitimacy. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 11, 751785.Google Scholar
United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (2014). Investigation of the Newark Police Department, July 22.Google Scholar
van den Bos, K., Lind, A., & Wilke, H. (2001). The psychology of procedural and distributive justice viewed from the perspective of fairness heuristic theory. In Cropanzano, R. (ed.), Justice in the Workplace: From Theory to Practice (vol. 2, pp. 4966). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
Vitale, A. (2017). The myth of liberal policing, The New Inquiry, April 5.Google Scholar
Walker, S., & Archbold, C. (2014). The New World of Police Accountability. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Weisburd, D., and Majmundar, M. K., eds. (2018). Proactive Policing: Effects on Crime and Communities. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Wildeboer, R. (2013). 8,000 Chicago cops now a little friendlier. WBEZ-News, Dec. 21.Google Scholar
Worden, R., & McLean, S. (2017). The Mirage of Police Reform: Procedural Justice and Police Legitimacy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Critic
  • Edited by David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, Anthony A. Braga, Northeastern University, Boston
  • Book: Police Innovation
  • Online publication: 09 August 2019
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108278423.005
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Critic
  • Edited by David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, Anthony A. Braga, Northeastern University, Boston
  • Book: Police Innovation
  • Online publication: 09 August 2019
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108278423.005
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Critic
  • Edited by David Weisburd, George Mason University, Virginia, Anthony A. Braga, Northeastern University, Boston
  • Book: Police Innovation
  • Online publication: 09 August 2019
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108278423.005
Available formats
×