Judges’ Perceptions of Systemic Racism in the Criminal Justice System
Abstract
Recognition of the causes and consequences of systemic racism, particularly related to the criminal justice system, has increased in recent years, in part because of the Black Lives Matter movement. Awareness of racism and how it intersects with the justice system is a first step to addressing it; thus, it is critical to understand the sentiment of justice employees regarding systemic racism. This content analysis assessed the sentiment of 632 judges who responded to The National Judicial College's Question of the Month. Approximately 65% believed that systemic racism exists in the criminal justice system. Assessment of open-ended responses revealed many themes. Some judges pointed toward disparate treatment, while others denied racism exists. Some claimed that racism occurs but is not systemic. Many said that disparities are not a result of racism, but a result of SES, education, etc. Judges specified training and reforms (e.g., bail) that are needed. Suggested solutions included increasing accountability for police, prosecutors, and judges who display discriminatory behavior. These solutions indicated that judges are amenable to training and other reforms; such policy shifts should be pursued.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Brewer, R. M., & Heitzeg, N. A. (2008) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764207307745 · Cited by 139 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Goldschmied, N., Ramona, A., Stilman, E., Bomberger, E., Lehman, F., Malek, K., & Minagawa, R. (2025) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.1177/00332941231202453
- Authors
- Holbrook, M. A., Dunbar, A., & Miller, M. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Nevada, Reno (US)
- Corresponding author
- Holbrook, Mia Abboud
- Venue
- Race and Justice
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2022-03-14
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 281-297
- ISSN
- 2153-3687 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4221006216
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 4
- FWCI
- 1.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Race and Justice (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Policing Practices and Perceptions
- Keywords
- systemic racism, criminal justice system, judges' perceptions, racial disparities, Black Lives Matter, judicial accountability, police accountability, bail reform, anti-racism training
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review