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
- 5 Regulating E-Cigarettes: Why Policies Diverge
- 6 Japanese Court Reform on Trial
- 7 Court Reform and Comparative Criminal Justice
- 8 The Birth of the Penal Organization: Why Prisons Were Born to Fail
- 9 The Misbegotten: Infanticide in Victorian England
- Part III Judicial Policymaking and the Modern State
- Part IV Political Liberalism and the Legal Complex
- Index
- Books in the Series
- References
7 - Court Reform and Comparative Criminal Justice
from Part II - Court Reform on Trial
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 April 2019
By
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
- 5 Regulating E-Cigarettes: Why Policies Diverge
- 6 Japanese Court Reform on Trial
- 7 Court Reform and Comparative Criminal Justice
- 8 The Birth of the Penal Organization: Why Prisons Were Born to Fail
- 9 The Misbegotten: Infanticide in Victorian England
- Part III Judicial Policymaking and the Modern State
- Part IV Political Liberalism and the Legal Complex
- Index
- Books in the Series
- References
Summary
Malcolm Feeley’s Court Reform on Trial: Why Simple Solutions Fail (Feeley 1983) is a monograph based on his report commissioned by the Twentieth Century Fund. The book may be less well known than both many of his earlier and later cutting-edge monographs (see e.g. Feeley 1979, or Feeley and Rubin 1998). But returning to it for the purpose of contributing to this collection made me realize just how good a read it is. Feeley offers us a meta-evaluation of selected court reforms from the 1950s to the 1970s, analyzing the problems that the reformers sought to resolve and the flaws in the solutions that they invented. Following a thoughtful introduction, the central chapters take us through the history of efforts to introduce bail reform, extend pretrial diversion, curb sentence disparities and expedite speedy trials.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Legal Process and the Promise of JusticeStudies Inspired by the Work of Malcolm Feeley, pp. 139 - 151Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Ashworth, And rew, Zedner, Lucia, and Tomlin, Patrick eds. 2013. Prevention and the Limits of the Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich. 2007. ‘The Cosmopolitan Condition: Why Methodological Nationalism Fails’. Theory, Culture and Society 24 (7–8): 286–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blumberg, Abraham S. 1967. ‘The Practice of Law as Confidence Game: Organizational Cooptation of a Profession’. Law & Society Review 1 (1): 15–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cassese, Sabino. 2001. ‘L’esplosione del diritto. Il sistema giuridico italiano dal 1975 al 2000’. Sociologia del Diritto XXVIII/I: 55–66.Google Scholar
Cavadino, Michael and Dignan., John 2006. Penal Systems: A Comparative Approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Church, Thomas. 1982. Examining Local Legal Culture – Practitioner Attitudes in Four Criminal Courts. NIJ.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm. 1979. The Process is the Punishment: Handling Cases in a Lower Criminal Court. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm. 1983. Court Reform on Trial: Why Simple Solutions Fail. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm. 1992. ‘Hollow Hopes, Flypaper, and Metaphors’. Law and Social Inquiry 17 (4): 745–60.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm. 1997. ‘Comparative Criminal Law for Criminologists: Comparing for What Purpose?’ In Comparing Legal Cultures, edited by Nelken, David, 93–104. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm. 2013. ‘Preface’. In Malcolm Feeley, Court Reform on Trial: Why Simple Solutions Fail. New Orleans: Quid Pro Books.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm. 2014. ‘The Unconvincing Case against Private Prisons’. Indiana Law Journal 89 (4): 1401–36.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M. and Levine, Kay. 2001. ‘Assaults on the Adversarial Process: Rethinking American Criminal Justice’. Punishment & Society 3 (4): 537–45.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm and Rubin, Ed. 1998. Judicial Policy Making and the Modern State: How the Courts Reformed America’s Prisons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm and Simon, Jonathan. 1994. ‘Actuarial Justice: The Emerging New Criminal Law’. In The Futures of Criminology, edited by Nelken, David, 173–201. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Field, Stewart and Nelken., David 2007. ‘Early Intervention and the Cultures of Youth Justice: A Comparison of Italy and Wales’. In European Ways of Law, edited by Gessner, Volkmar and Nelken, David, 349–74. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Ferrajoli, Luigi. 1990 [2011]. Diritto e Ragione: Teoria del garantismo penale. Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
Ferrajoli, Liugi. 1993. ‘Note critiche ed autocritiche intorno alla discussione su Diritto e Ragione’. In Le Ragioni del Garantismo. Discutendo con Luigi Ferrajoli, edited by Gianformaggio, Letizia, 459–520. Torino: Giappichelli.Google Scholar
Garland, Brett, Hogan, Nancy, Wodahl, Eric, Hass, Aida, Stohr, Mary K and Lambert., Eric 2014. ‘Decarceration and its Possible Effects on Inmates, Staff, and Communities’. Punishment & Society 16: 448–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1973. ‘Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture’. In The Interpretation of Culture, edited by Geertz, Clifford. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
Geertz, Clifford. 1983. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Halliday, Terry, Karpik, Lucien and Feeley, Malcom. 2007. Fighting for Political Freedom: Comparative Studies of the Legal Complex and Political Liberalism. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Hammergren, Linn. 2007. Envisioning Reform: Improving Judicial Performance in Latin America. University Park: Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, Mireille. 2015. Smart Technologies and the End(s) of Law: Novel Entanglements of Law and Technology. Cheltenham: Elgar.Google Scholar
Lacey, Nicola. 2008. The Prisoners’ Dilemma: Political Economy and Punishment in Contemporary Democracies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinson, Robert. 1974. ‘What Works? Questions and Answers about Prison Reform’. The Public Interest 22–54.Google Scholar
Melossi, Dario. 1994. ‘The Economy of Illegalities’. In The Futures of Criminology, edited by Nelken, David, 202–19. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Melossi, Dario, Sozzo, Massimo and Sparks, Richard, eds. 2011. Travels of the Criminal Question: Cultural Embeddedness and Diffusion. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 1993. ‘Le giustificazioni della pena ed i diritti dell’imputato’. In Le ragioni del garantismo: Discutendo con Luigi Ferrajoli, edited by Gianformaggio, Letizia, 275–307. Giappicheli: Torino.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 1996. ‘Judicial Politics and Corruption in Italy’. In The Corruption of Politics and the Politics of Corruption: special issue of the Journal of Law and Society, edited by Nelken, David and Levi, Michael, 95–113.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2000. ‘Telling Difference: Of Crime and Criminal Justice in Italy’. In Contrasting Criminal Justice, edited by Nelken, David, 233–64. Aldershot: Dartmouth.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2001. ‘Can Law Learn from Social Science?’ Israel Law Review 2–3: 1–20.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2003a. ‘Beyond Compare? Criticising the American Way of Law’. Law and Social Inquiry 28 (3): 181–213.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2003b. ‘Legitimate Suspicion? Berlusconi and the Judges’. In The Second Berlusconi Government: Politics in Italy, edited by Segatti, Paulo and Blondel, Jan, 112–28. Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2004. ‘Using the Concept of Legal Culture’. Australian Journal of Legal Philosophy 29: 1–28.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2009. ‘Comparative Criminal Justice: Beyond Ethnocentricism and Relativism’. European Journal of Criminology 6 (4): 291–311.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2010. Comparative Criminal Justice: Making Sense of Difference. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2011. ‘Using Legal Culture: Prospects and Problems’. In Journal of Comparative Law, special issue, edited by Nelken, David, 14 (2): 1–39.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2012. ‘Comparative Criminal Justice’. In Oxford Handbook of Criminology (5th edn.), edited by Mike, Maguire, Rod, Morgan and Reiner, Robert, 138–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2014. ‘Can Prosecutors Be Too Independent? An Italian Case-Study’. In European Penology?, edited by Daems, Tom, Snacken, Sonja, van der vyl Smit, Dirk, 241–61. Oxford: Hart.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2015. ‘Foil Comparisons or Foiled Comparisons? Learning from Italian Juvenile Justice’. European Journal of Criminology 12: 519–34.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2016. ‘From Pains-Taking to Pains-Giving Comparisons’. International Journal of Law in Context 12 (4): 390–403.Google Scholar
Nelken, David. 2016. ‘Comparative Legal Research and Legal Culture: Facts, Approaches and Values’. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 12: 45–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sarzotti, Claudio. 2007. Processi de selezione del crimine. Procure della republica e organizzazione giudiziaria. Milan: Giuffrè.Google Scholar
Sherman, Lawrence W., Gottfredson, Denise, MacKenzie, Doris, John, Eck, Reuter, Peter and Bushway., Shawn 1998. Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising, a Report to the United States Congress. NIJ.Google Scholar
Twining, William. 2005. ‘Have Concepts, Will Travel’. International Journal of Law in Context 1 (4): 427–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waquant, Loic. 2009b. Punishing the Poor: The Neoliberal Government of Social Insecurity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Whitman, Jim Q. 2005. Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide between America and Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar