Racial Inequalities in the Judicial System Against Minorities - Research Paper Example

Racial Inequalities in the Judicial System Against Minorities According to the United States Justice Department, in 2003, about 10.4 percent of all African American men between ages 25 to 29 were incarcerated as compared to 2.4 percent of Hispanic men and 1.2 percent of Non-Hispanic White men. What is going on here? Why are Black men in this age group so much more likely to be in jail than are Whites or Hispanics? This paper will investigate the answers to the above questions. Specifically, this paper will explore the ethnicity variable in the American judicial system – how race is associated with who gets involved in crime prison enrolment and what happen to minorities within the American legal system. Racial Inequality Hypothesis Unarguably, as the statistics available from all concerned government agencies demonstrate, there is a racial dimension in the prison enrolment in the US. The bulk of the incarcerated in country so far belongs to the African American population. This trend has been going on since the Black emancipation in the late nineteenth century and way past the success of the civil rights movement. The hypothesis for this is that despite all the developments in the racial equality in American society, there are still traces of discrimination and social stratification present today. This is true in almost all aspects of American life – from wages, job opportunities, health and mortality statistics and, in the case of this research, prison enrolment. Biased Outcomes There are various, specific and significant cases that demonstrate the race hypothesis in the American legal system, particularly in the way justice is dispensed with. For instance, a study conducted by Velez, which examined the cases of 755 defendants from the Southwest (Tucson, Arizona and El, Paso Texas), it was found that racial inequality characterized several criminal justice outcomes. To quote: Hispanic was the single best predictor of an unfavorable pretrial release decision… Being Black also was significantly related to an unfavorable pretrial release decision… Moreover, regardless of jurisdiction, blacks were significantly more likely to go to trial than other racial groups, while being Hispanic… was a significant predictor of a guilty verdict. (p. 95) This pattern, for some, can readily be attributed to at least two reasons: the disproportionate representation of minority judges in the American legal system and the often-white constitution of juries in criminal trials of Black defendants. In California, for example where members of the minority groups make up 56 percent of the population, the minority judges only comprises 15 percent in the state judiciary. (Gaines and Miller 2008, p. 260) In the past years, of the nearly 900 federal judges, only about 10 percent are African Americans, 7 percent are Hispanics, and 1 percent are Asian Americans and observers credit this to past discriminations in law schools, which led to the limited pool of experienced minority attorneys who have political ties, access to “old boys network” and career opportunities the lead to judgeships. (p. 260) Many policy-makers who oppose the diversification of American judiciary often cite the argument that judges must be impartial and that it makes no difference whether a judge is Black, Asian, Hispanic or White. Of course, this is not the case. The lack of diversity and understanding in the person who sits in the bench often leads to wrongful convictions and injustices committed to minority defendants at court. The above variables coupled with the economic status of the minorities result in adverse and bias outcomes in criminal processes. Westervelt and Humphrey (2001) summed this up quite effectively in the following analysis: Urban areas where blacks face concerted disadvantage – extreme levels of poverty concentration, joblessness, racial isolation, family disruption, and lack of residential mobility – are places where the largest racial discrepancies in wrongful convictions are likely to be found. Jurors, who are primarily white, are more likely to vote for guilt cases in which evidence is weak when the defendant is seen as “different” and “not like our families and neighbors” and segregated housing increases what we might call the social distance of race. (p. 127) The economic variable is highlighted in the above statement especially as Blacks and the minorities are more likely to be wrongly convicted than the Whites since the latter have relatively more money, knowledge, power and traditional influence to mount a successful defense against criminal prosecution. Minorities are, due to their economic disadvantage, are less capable of retaining the services of the best attorneys to defend their cases. Stereotyping Then there is also the case of racial stereotyping. Blacks are most likely to be accused of crime, most likely to be believed of committing them even when they are innocent. The law enforcement agencies across the US – such as police departments, state patrols, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the US Customs Service, the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security – have consistently come under attack for their long-standing policies of racial profiling. Here, there is the use of ethnoracial stereotypes in making investigative stops and arrests. (Newman 2006, p. 417) With the stereotyping and biases in making arrests, ethnoracial imbalance are sure to make its way in incarceration rates as well. Newman enumerated the related most recent statistics: The Bureau of Justice Statistics estimates that 12% of black males, close to 4 % of Latino males, but only 1.6% white males in their 20s are currently in prison or jail. Race and ethnicity also affect the amount of time a convict spends locked up. With convictions for similar crimes, the average federal prison sentence for Whites is 33% shorter than it is for Blacks. (p. 417) There are numerous cases wherein White offenders have successfully exploited the American society’s fear of the Black men to their advantage. In America, stereotyping and such fear for the Blacks can result in the authorities believing that there is a Black perpetrator when in fact the individual providing the description actually committed the crime. For instance, in 1994 this happened when a South Carolina woman reported a Black man who stole her car and her children were still in the vehicle and that for days she has fooled authorities and the public pleading for her children’s lives. (Greene and Gabbidon 2009, p. 166) It was only after she confessed that the authorities found out the truth that the woman actually murdered her children. In this regard, Brougham (2009) stressed that within the American legal system, stereotyping and the treatment that leads to the myth of the criminal black man may be outwardly insignificant in any one area of society but that it is instead an accumulated result of history, politics, media and social policies. (p. 166) Anatomy of Inequality Menchaca (2001) maintained that the general views about race are premised upon the meaning and value people are accorded with. (p. 3) That is why it is not surprising that the way minorities are seen from the perspective of a White society is inevitably clouded by prejudice that has characterized America since its founding and have been institutionalized in various areas – social, political, religious, cultural and legal. However, people would preach that America and being American all about equality, equal rights and individual liberty, the fact remains that discrimination is still a way of life. In the legal system, this has been institutionalized. If one looks and closely examines American history, he or she would find that the most powerful tool employed for the construction of the white racial supremacy was the US legal system itself. It was rooted, wrote Durant and Knottnerus (1999), from the slavery system in America because the origin of the legal system is founded on the laws that legalized and institutionalized inequality and the color prejudice for its purposes and perpetuation. (p. 102) The evidences available and the experiences of minorities in America points to the fact that historical racism has been supported by law and that, unfortunately, such legal framework established the legal foundation for contemporary racial discrimination and race relations in America. Today, there is a dilemma in the judicial system to balance the established norms, which emphasize social status and economic competition with the morality that calls for equal rights and an end to racial discrimination. One must remember that in the chronology of the US history, including the modern period, one sees how the country used its legal system to confer social and economic privileges upon Whites and to discriminate against people of color. Racial characteristics were effectively used to classify people into groups meriting privilege, while dissimilar groups were deemed unworthy. (Menchaca, p. 3) Conclusion What the patterns and trends found in prison statistics underscore the degree of America’s racial inequality. Much has been said and done about the improvement on the issue of racial discrimination in this country, and certainly, there are significant milestones and breakthrough in regard to policies and race relations. However, there remains the fact still that inequality has persisted despite great optimism for the social progress in the US. Furthermore, such inequality is a result of a deep-rooted and intertwined factors that are difficult to collectively eradicate. The current punitive turn in the American legal system has been unfair at best and certainly disappointed the promise of the civil rights movement. The legal system is an institution in America that puts burden on the disadvantaged African American and the minorities. Addressing the problem is a challenge because, as mentioned elsewhere in this paper, America is in the midst of a dilemma on balancing the religious morality and political equality with the economic expediency and social status – variables that drive modern discrimination in all its forms. In the discourse in regard to how to solve the racial dilemma in the American legal system, it is crucial to highlight that incarceration comes with the stigma of criminality not just on individuals but on racial and disadvantaged groups, which affect not only themselves but their families, friends and their sons and daughters. While, it is difficult to determine whether the disproportionate representation of the Blacks and other minorities is an overt discrimination on the part of social and political institutions, there is the fact of its existence and it is not a coincidence but a sustained phenomenon. Certainly, a deeper examination needs to be undertaken in order to fully understand the dynamics of the trend. But, again, the statistics, documents and the body of evidences and literature identify Blacks and minorities as disadvantaged groups in the legal system. It has to be corrected and the resources for it to be achieved are available. References Brougham, P. (2009). "Critical Race Theory" In Helen Greene and Shaun Gabbidon's Encyclopedia of Race and Crime. London: SAGE. Durant, T and Knottnerus, D. (1999). Plantation society and race relations: the origins of inequality. Greenwood Publishing Group. Gaines, L. and Miller, L. (2008). Criminal Justice in Action . New York: Cengage Learning. Greene, H. and Gabbidon, S. (2009). Encyclopedia of Race and Crime. London: SAGE. Menchaca, M. (2001). Recovering history, constructing race: the Indian, Black, and white roots of Mexican Americans. University of Texas Press. Newman, D. (2006). Sociology: exploring the architecture of everyday life . Pine Forge Press. Velez, W. (1998). Race and Ethnicity in the United States: An Institutional Approach. Rowman & Littlefield. Westervelt, S. and Humphrey, J. (2001). Wrongly convicted: perspectives on failed justice. Rutger University Press. Read More