Does Racial Balance in Workforce Representation Yield Equal Justice? Race Relations of Sentencing in Federal Court Organizations

Abstract

Increasing racial and ethnic group representation in justice‐related occupations is considered a potential remedy to racial inequality in justice administration, including sentencing disparity. Studies to date yield little evidence of such an effect; however, research limitations may account for the mixed and limited evidence of the significance of justice workforce racial diversity. Specifically, few studies consider group‐level dynamics of race and representation, thus failing to contextualize racial group power relations in justice administration. To consider these contextual dynamics we combine court organizational and case‐level data from 89 federal districts and use hierarchical models to assess whether variably “representative” work groups relate to district‐level differences in sentencing. Using district‐specific indexes of population and work group dissimilarity to define representation, we find no relationships between black judge representation and sentencing in general across districts, but that districts with more black representation among prosecutors are significantly less likely to sentence defendants to terms of imprisonment. We also find in districts with increased black representation among prosecutors, and to a lesser degree among judges, that black defendants are less likely to be imprisoned and white defendants are more likely to be imprisoned, with the effect of narrowing black‐white disparities in sentencing. Consistent with the “power‐threat” perspective, and perhaps “implicit racial bias” research, findings encourage modeling diversity to account for relative racial group power in processes of social control and suggest that racial justice may be moderately advanced by equal representation among authorities.

Judges on Trial

“…Because the focus of the present study is on the influence of judicial background characteristics in the sentencing of criminal cases, studies of appellate case outcomes (e.g., Collins & Moyer, 2007;Nagel, 1961;Tiede, Carp, & Manner, 2010;Walker & Barrow, 1985), federal magistrate outcomes (Kulik et al, 2003), State Supreme Court outcomes (e.g., Songer & Crews-Meyer, 2000;Songer & Tabrizi, 1999), and Federal Supreme Court outcomes (e.g., Tate, 1981) are omitted, as are the few studies examining aggregate districtlevel characteristics (e.g., Schanzenbach, 2005;Ward et al, 2009). Because the focus of the present study is on the influence of judicial background characteristics in the sentencing of criminal cases, studies of appellate case outcomes (e.g., Collins & Moyer, 2007;Nagel, 1961;Tiede, Carp, & Manner, 2010;Walker & Barrow, 1985), federal magistrate outcomes (Kulik et al, 2003), State Supreme Court outcomes (e.g., Songer & Crews-Meyer, 2000;Songer & Tabrizi, 1999), and Federal Supreme Court outcomes (e.g., Tate, 1981) are omitted, as are the few studies examining aggregate districtlevel characteristics (e.g., Schanzenbach, 2005;Ward et al, 2009).…”

Crack Pipes and Policing: A Case Study of Institutional Racism and Remedial Action in Cleveland

“…Social psychological research on empathy and intergroup relations has generally demonstrated promising paths to triggering prosocial attitudes and behaviors toward disadvantaged out‐groups by reshaping in‐group/out‐group boundaries, then marshalling group‐based emotions to promote social change (Thomas, McGarty, and Mavor 2009). Furthermore, Ward, Farrell, and Rousseau's (2009) findings that diverse institutional work groups within the federal courts are associated with lessened racial disparities in sentence outcomes imply one very straightforward route to remediation (although perhaps easier said than done)—diversifying those groups that hold the power to charge, prosecute, and sentence within criminal justice institutions. Such a remedy should open the door not only for more equitable empathy across populations subject to criminal sanction, but may also allow for exchanges between racially diverse actors within the institutional settings that could serve to heighten awareness about empathetic aspects of different cases.…”

“…3 3 Indeed, in the death penalty context, Craig Haney (2004) has persuasively argued that the “empathic divide” between predominantly White capital jurors and African American capital defendants contributes to discriminatory death sentencing. In a federal criminal court context, Ward, Farrell, and Rousseau (2009) have demonstrated that racially disparate sentencing outcomes are influenced by the racial and ethnic diversity of court work groups, in that the Black‐White sentencing gap in the federal system was significantly narrowed as a function of relative racial diversity of individual U.S. attorney's offices. …”

Locating the Judge within Sentencing Research

“…Several researchers seek to isolate the effects of the demographic and racial composition of various actors in the criminal justice system, including judges (Spohn 1990;Tiede et al 2010;Welch et al 1988;Wooldredge 2010), prosecutors (Ward et al 2009), and the local legal profession (King et al 2010). Judge level variables including gender, race/ethnicity, age and time on bench serve as proxy measures of judicial decision making (Johnson and DiPietro 2012).…”

“…To enhance the explanatory power of models, some researchers incorporate measures of courtroom context, including judge level variables, and external environments, such as political forces (Bontrager et al 2005;Johnson 2005;Myers and Talarico 1987;Ulmer 2012;Ulmer and Johnson 2004;Ward et al 2009). Several researchers seek to isolate the effects of the demographic and racial composition of various actors in the criminal justice system, including judges (Spohn 1990;Tiede et al 2010;Welch et al 1988;Wooldredge 2010), prosecutors (Ward et al 2009), and the local legal profession (King et al 2010).…”