Carceral Con

Whitlock, Kay; Heitzeg, Nancy A.

doi:10.2307/j.ctv1wvms7k

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recent punishment and society scholarship has addressed the limits of policy reforms aimed at reducing mass incarceration in the U.S. This work has focused in particular on the political dimensions of penal legal reform and policy-making, and the compromises and shortcomings in those processes (e.g., Aviram, 2015;Beckett et al, 2016Beckett et al, , 2018Campbell et al, 2020;Cate, 2016;Gottschalk, 2016;Seeds, 2017;Whitlock and Heitzeg, 2021). A nascent line of research has also explored how reforms play out on the ground (Lerman and Mooney, 2022;Martin, 2016;Verma, 2015), including some of the downsides of reform for those subject to punishment (Cate, 2022) and the illusory impact of reform on the use of imprisonment (Beckett et al, 2018;Beckett and Beach, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosecutors as punishers: A case study of Trump-era practices

Lynch

2023

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent punishment and society scholarship has addressed the limits of policy reforms aimed at reducing mass incarceration in the U.S. This work has focused in particular on the political dimensions of penal legal reform and policy-making, and the compromises and shortcomings in those processes. Nearly absent in this scholarship, however, has been empirical and theoretical engagement with the role of front-line prosecutors as facilitators and/or resistors to downsizing efforts. Using the case of the U.S. federal criminal legal system's modest efforts to decrease the system's racially disparate and punitive outcomes, this paper elucidates the fragile nature of such reforms by delineating the critical role that front-line prosecutors play in maintaining punitive approaches. Focusing specifically on federal prosecutorial policy and practices in the Trump era, I draw on a subset of data from an interdisciplinary, multi-methodological project set in distinct federal court jurisdictions in the U.S. to examine how front-line prosecutors were able to quickly reverse course on reform through the use of their uniquely powerful charging and plea-bargaining tools. My findings illustrate how federal prosecutors pursued more low-level defendants, and utilized statutory “hammers,” including mandatory minimums and mandatory enhancements to ensure harsh punishments in a swift return to a war-on-crime.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prosecutors as punishers: A case study of Trump-era practices

Lynch

2023

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reform refers to bringing change in power dynamics, reducing harm from underlying strategies, and ensuring equal opportunities indiscriminate of race, class, and gender (Whitlock & Heitzeg, 2021). As a part of prison reform, the PREA 2003, which also created National Prison Rape Reduction Commission, was enacted to eliminate and create guidelines for the prevention and handling of sexual assault in prison, the imposition of a zero-tolerance policy for the offense, and the instruction and training of prison personnel (Jenness & Smyth, 2011;Smith, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Overview of Prison Rape Elimination Acts (Prea) 2003

Shamim Ara Pia

2024

IJLPS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective of this paper is to briefly focus on a reform related to prison called PREA which stands for Prison Rape Elimination Act, 2003. Prison Rape Elimination Act is a US federal law that was implemented in 2003 to eradicate rape in prisons. PREA created principles for recognizing, preventing, and responding to sexual abuse and harassment in correctional settings such as prisons, jails, juvenile facilities, and immigration detention centers. The law also requires data collecting and reporting on incidences of sexual abuse within these facilities, as well as staff training to avoid such incidents. However, PREA 2003 could not meet all the criteria included in its principles to eliminate rape culture in the prison. From this concern, the main aim of this paper is to focus on a reform related to prisons called Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) 2003, the reasons why this act was put into place, the current status of prison rape, the positive, and negative impact of PREA 2003, probable strategies that can be helpful for the appropriate implementation of PREA 2003. To accomplish this endeavor, this research followed systematic literature review methods due to the availability of scholarly work in this field. Although PREA 2003 has some positive aspects, the overall analysis of this study has uncovered that PREA 2003 was not implemented accurately due to some of the practical problems related to it. There are still some improvements that need to be accomplished for the appropriate implementation of PREA 2003 for the prisoners. Some suggested ways were discussed in this study to improve the implementation of PREA 2003.

show abstract

CJRPublications Received 2022

2022

Criminal Justice Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carceral Con

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Prosecutors as punishers: A case study of Trump-era practices

Prosecutors as punishers: A case study of Trump-era practices

An Overview of Prison Rape Elimination Acts (Prea) 2003

CJRPublications Received 2022

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About