Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-5d6d958fb5-8cb25 Total loading time: 0.186 Render date: 2022-11-29T12:53:25.480Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": false, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

What were “They” Thinking, and Does it Matter? Structural Inequality and Individual Intent in Criminal Justice Reform

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 July 2019

Abstract

In Visions of Social Control (1985) Stanley Cohen provided a typology of scholarly works on the punitive turn: “uneven progress,” “good intentions-disastrous consequences,” and “discipline and mystification.” This Essay applies these categories to recent punishment and society scholarship, finding a clear preference for the third category, arguing that current works do not merely point to systemic evils—they impute bad intent to individuals in the system. Against this current, I identify two works—James Forman’s Locking Up Our Own (2017) and Heather Schoenfeld’s Building the Prison State (2016)—and show the strengths of analyses that take individual actors on their own terms. Finally, relying on the recent example of the Ban the Box initiative—a well-intended but failed policy—I argue that flexibility in viewing actors’ motivations, rather than relegating them to the role of cogs in a system fraught by inherent flaws, is important not only for scholarly accuracy but for policy and strategic reasons.

Type
Review Essays
Copyright
© 2019 American Bar Foundation 

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.)

Footnotes

She is thankful to Binyamin Blum, Malcolm Feeley, Johann Kohler, Ashley Rubin, and Reuel Schiller for our conversations about historicism and theorizing. This Essay is dedicated to the memory and legacy of Stanley Cohen.

References

REFERENCES

Agan, Amanda, and Starr, Sonja. “Ban the Box, Criminal Records, and Statistical Discrimination: A Field Experiment.” University of Michigan Law & Economics Research Paper No. 16-012, June 14, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrews, Timothy, Schluppeck, Denis, Homfray, Dave, Matthews, Paul, and Blakemore, Colin. “Activity in the Fusiform Gyrus Predicts Conscious Perception of Rubin’s Vase–Face Illusion.” Neuroimage 23 (2004): 905–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. New York: The New Press, 2010.Google Scholar
Arnett, George. “Crime Statistics in England and Wales: How Significant Is the Decline?” The Guardian. April 24, 2014. https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/apr/24/statistics-in-england-and-wales-how-significant-is-the-decline.Google Scholar
Aviram, Hadar. Cheap on Crime: Recession-Era Politics and the Transformation of American Punishment. Oakland, CA: University of California Press, 2015.Google Scholar
Beckett, Katherine. Making Crime Pay: Law and Order in Contemporary American Politics. New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.Google Scholar
Brown, David. “Neoliberalism as a Criminological Subject.” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology 44. no. 1 (2011): 129–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cloward, Richard A., and Ohlin, Lloyd. Delinquency and Opportunity. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2001 [1960].Google Scholar
Cohen, Stanley. Visions of Social Control: Crime, Punishment and Classification. London: Polity Press, 1985.Google Scholar
Dagan, David, and Teles, Steven. Prison Break: Why Conservatives Turned Against Mass Incarceration. New York: Oxford University Press, 2016.Google Scholar
Doleac, Jennifer L., and Hansen, Benhamin. “Does ‘Ban the Box’ Help or Hurt Low-Skilled Workers? Statistical Discrimination and Employment Outcomes When Criminal Histories are Hidden.” NBER Working Paper No. 22469, JEL No. J15, J7, J78, K42, 2016.Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M. Court Reform on Trial: Why Simple Solutions Fail. New York: Quid Pro, 2013 [1983].Google Scholar
Feeley, Malcolm M. “Opening Keynote Address: How to Think About Criminal Court Reform.” Boston University Law Review 98 (2018): 673730.Google Scholar
Forman, James Jr. Locking Up Our Own: Crime and Punishment in Black America. New York: Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2017.Google Scholar
Fortner, Michael Javen. The Black Silent Majority. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by Alan Sheridan. New York: Vintage, 2012 [1979].Google Scholar
Garland, David. “Criminological Knowledge and Its Relation to Power: Foucault’s Genealogy and Criminology Today.” British Journal of Criminology 32, no. 4 (1992): 403–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gonzalez Van Cleve, Nicole. Crook County: Racism and Injustice in America’s Largest Criminal Court. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Law Books, 2016.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, Marie. The Prison and the Gallows: The Politics of Mass Incarceration in America. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Darnell. “Beyond Anomalies: Rethinking the Conflict Perspective on Race and Criminal Punishment.” Social Forces 65, no. 3 (1987): 719–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinton, Elizabeth. From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jenison, David. “Was Harry Anslinger a Racist?” Prohbtd (2016). https://prohbtd.com/was-harry-anslinger-a-racist.Google Scholar
LoBianco Tom. “Report: Top Nixon Aide Says War on Drugs Targeted Blacks, Hippies.” CNN Politics. March 24, 2016. https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/23/politics/john-ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html. Google Scholar
Lynch, Mona. Sunbelt Justice: Arizona and the Transformation of American Punishment. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, 2009.Google Scholar
Lynch, Mona. “(Im)migrating Penal Excess: Sheriff Joe Arpaio and the Case of Maricopa County, Arizona.” In Extreme Punishment: Comparative Studies in Detention, Incarceration and Solitary Confinement. Edited by Reiter, Keramet and Koenig, Alexa. New York: Palgrave, 2015.Google Scholar
Lynch, Mona. Hard Bargains: The Coercive Power of Drug Laws in Federal Court. New York: Russell Sage, 2016.Google Scholar
Mason, Paul. “Joe Arpaio’s Prison Was a Circus of Cruelty. Now His Values Are Spreading.” The Guardian. August 28, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/28/donald-trump-far-right-joe-arpaio.Google Scholar
Matthews, Roger. “The Myth of Punitiveness.” Theoretical Criminology 9 (2005): 175201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melossi, Dario, and Pavarini, Massimo. The Prison and the Factory: Origins of the Penitentiary System. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2018 [1978].Google Scholar
Merton, Robert. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press, 1968 [1949].Google Scholar
Metcalf, Stephen. “Neoliberalism: The Idea that Swallowed the World. The Guardian. August 18, 2017. https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/aug/18/neoliberalism-the-idea-that-changed-the-world. Google Scholar
Muhammad, Khalil Gibran. The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murakawa, Naomi. The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America. New York: Oxford University Press, 2014.Google Scholar
Perkinson, Robert. Texas Tough: The Rise of America’s Prison Empire. New York: Metropolitan Books, 2010.Google Scholar
Platt, Anthony. The Triumph of Benevolence: The Origins of the Juvenile Justice System in the United States. Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Law and Society, 1972.Google Scholar
Rosen, Ruth. The Lost Sisterhood: Prostitution in America, 1900–1918. Baltimore, MD: JHS Press, 1982.Google Scholar
Rothman, David. The Discovery of the Asylum: Social Order and Disorder in the New Republic. Boston: Little Brown, 1971.Google Scholar
Rothman, David. Conscience and Convenience: The Asylum and Its Alternatives in Progressive America. Boston: Little Brown, 1980.Google Scholar
Rubin, Ashley. “True Believers, Rational Actors, and Bad Actors: Placing The Prison and the Factory in Penal-Historiographic Context.” Punishment and Society (forthcoming 2019).Google Scholar
Rubin, Edgar. Visuell Wahrgenommene Figuren. Copenhagen: Gyldenalske Boghandel, 1915.Google Scholar
Rusche, Georg, and Kircheimer, Otto. Punishment and Social Structure. New York: Transaction, 2003 [1939].Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin. When the State Kills: Capital Punishment and the American Condition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin. Gruesome Spectacles: Botched Executions and America’s Death Penalty. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Law Books, 2014.Google Scholar
Schlanger, Margo. “ Plata v. Brown and Realignment: Jails, Prisons, Courts, and Politics.” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 48, no. 1 (2013): 165215.Google Scholar
Schlanger, Margo. “No Reason to Blame Liberals (or, the Unbearable Lightness of Perversity Arguments).” The New Rambler: An Online Review of Books. 2015. =http://newramblerreview.com/component/content/article?id=49:no-reason-to-blame-liberals.Google Scholar
Schoenfeld, Heather. Building the Prison State: Race and the Politics of Mass Incarceration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, Jonathan. Governing Through Crime: How the War on Drugs Transformed American Democracy and Created a Culture of Fear. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.Google Scholar
Simon, Jonathan. Mass Incarceration on Trial: A Remarkable Court Decision and the Future of Prisons in America. New York: The New Press, 2014.Google Scholar
Soss, Joe, Fording, Richard, and Schram, Sanford. Disciplining the Poor: Neoliberal Paternalism and the Persistent Power of Race. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spierenburg, Peter. “From Amsterdam to Auburn: An Explanation for the Rise of the Prison in Seventeenth-Century Holland and Nineteenth-Century America.” Journal of Social History 20, no.3 (1987): 439–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stacy, Christina, and Cohen, Mychal. “Ban the Box and Racial Discrimination: A Review of the Evidence and Policy Recommendations”. Urban Policy Institute. 2017. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/88366/ban_the_box_and_racial_discrimination.pdf. Google Scholar
Wacquant, Loïc. Punishing the Poor: The Neoliberal Government of Social Insecurity. Raleigh, NC: Duke University Press, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, John, and DeLisi, Matt. Conservative Criminology: A Call to Restore Balance to the Social Sciences. New York: Taylor and Francis, 2016.Google Scholar
Zimring, Franklin. The Great American Crime Decline. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save article to Kindle

To save this article 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.

What were “They” Thinking, and Does it Matter? Structural Inequality and Individual Intent in Criminal Justice Reform
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

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

What were “They” Thinking, and Does it Matter? Structural Inequality and Individual Intent in Criminal Justice Reform
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

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

What were “They” Thinking, and Does it Matter? Structural Inequality and Individual Intent in Criminal Justice Reform
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *