Disproportionate Minority Contact: An Expanded Examination of how Threat of Violent and Sexual Offending Impacts Court Outcomes

Racial disparities in the U.S. juvenile justice system appear to be attenuated for people with sexual and violent versus drug and property offenses. Existing theories such as the racial threat hypothesis partially explain these racial disparities, but the definition of “threat” could limit our ability to explain juvenile justice outcomes across offense categories. Importantly, research often overlooks the different and unique threats associated with violent and sexual crimes. The present study examined impacts of racial threat and an expanded definition of “threat” associated with violent and sexual crime on (a) preadjudication detention and (b) dispositions of postadjudication confinement. Statewide archival court data were obtained regarding 212,274 male and female adolescents. In the full models, less severe violent (assault vs. homicide) and sexual offenses (indecent exposure and child pornography vs. sexual abuse) were associated with lower use of detention and secure confinement. This impact of specific violent and sexual offenses on court outcomes were observed in models run with Black adolescents and models separated by violent offenses and sexual offenses. Higher rates of county-level homicide prosecutions and White-to-Black unemployment were significantly and positively associated with detention and confinement, respectively. Racial threat and other theories aiming to explain racial disparities should be reexamined and modified to include markers of violent and sexual offense stigma and threat. Further, models testing racial disparities should include an expanded definition of “threat” in selecting indicators. Our suggested modified theory could better elucidate racial disparities in the juvenile justice system and presents important practice implications.

Don’t You be My Neighbor: Support for Racial-Exclusion Constitutional Provisions in Mid-19th Century Indiana and Illinois

Racially discriminatory provisions in the U.S. Constitution and southern state constitutions have been extensively analyzed, but insufficient attention has been brought to these provisions when included in northern state constitutions. We examine constitutional provisions excluding blacks from entering the state that were adopted by various northern states in the mid-19th Century. Previous scholarship has focused on the statements and votes of the convention delegates who framed these provisions. However, positions taken by delegates need not have aligned with the views of their constituents. Delegates to state constitutional conventions held in Illinois in 1847, Indiana in 1850 and 1851, and Oregon in 1857 opted to submit to voters racial-exclusion provisions separate from the vote to approve the rest of the constitution. We exploit this institutional feature by using county-level election returns in Illinois and Indiana to test claims about the importance of partisan affiliation, religious denomination, social-welfare policy concerns, labor competition, and racial-threat theory in motivating popular support for entrenching racially discriminatory policies in constitutions. We find greater levels of support for racial exclusion in areas where Democratic candidates polled better and in areas closer to slave-holding states where social-welfare policy concerns would be heightened. We find lower levels of support for racial exclusion in areas (in Indiana) with greater concentrations of Quakers. Our findings are not consistent with labor competition or racial-threat theories.

The Black Effect: Reimagining Racial Threat Through a Black Absolute Status Lens

Sentencing scholars have established the importance of examining how contextual-level factors influence judicial decision-making. Several studies have tested whether the presence of, or change in, minority populations—indicators of racial threat—impact disparate treatment of racial/ethnic minorities. Relying on these conceptualizations, however, ignores other important nuances of racial threat. The current study addresses this methodological limitation by employing a newly established comprehensive conceptualization of racial threat. More specifically, data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing (FY2013-2015) are used to examine whether Black absolute status, a measure that taps into the sociopolitical position of Black citizens, influences the nature of racial disparities. Findings suggest that Black/White sentence disparities may be moderated by the extent of Black absolute status at the county level.

Driving While Black and Brown in Vermont: Can Race Data Analysis Contribute to Reform?

Many states now require law enforcement to collect race data on traffic stops, but there has been little research on the use of that data to inform public policy or reform efforts at the agency level. This article addresses that lacuna by presenting results from the first statewide analysis of Vermont traffic stop data. Racial threat theory, a subset of stratification theory, would predict that policing in a predominantly white state like Vermont would exhibit lower racial disparities than states with a more racially diverse population because the “threat” to white dominance is less. The results contradict that prediction. Vermont, despite its reputation as a liberal state, is not different from other states in exhibiting wide racial disparities in policing. And yet, analysis and dissemination of race data in policing, by providing an evidentiary basis for citizen claims of racial bias, contributed to action on the part of the state legislature and government to address racial discrimination not only in policing but also in the broader criminal justice system. We report on those reform efforts and on the actions taken by three reform-minded law enforcement agencies to reduce and eliminate unjustifiable racial disparities in policing.

Representation, Incorporation, and Corrections Spending: The Counterbalancing Effect of Black Political Incorporation

Theories concerning the adoption of punitive policies at the state level often cite two dynamics: conservative ideology and racial threat, that punitive policies are more likely in states with Republican politicians and a higher proportion of Black residents. I argue these theories lose their explanatory power in the post-Civil Rights era, and suggest Black political incorporation acts as a powerful antidote to the punitive impulses of government officials. I test my hypotheses on a dataset of state corrections spending from 1983 to 2011 and find evidence for the counterbalancing argument. States with increasing percentages of Black state legislators spend .36 fewer dollars per capita on corrections, suggesting Black political incorporation is an important mediator in the relationship between racial threat and corrections budgets. This paper has implications for the application of the social control theory as descriptive representation grows, but also for the study of the effect of minority politicians on budgets and policy more broadly. The adoption of policies deleterious to certain communities can be mitigated by the presence of representatives who legislate on behalf of those communities.