Cited by 210Criminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisCriminal Justice and PenologyCriminal Law and Policy

Risk as a Proxy for Race

Open access
Harcourt, Bernard E.·2015·Federal Sentencing Reporter

Abstract

Actuarial risk assessment in the implementation and administration of criminal sentencing has a long history in this country – a long and fraught history. Today, many progressive advocates promote the use of actuarial risk assessment instruments as part of a strategy to reduce the problem of "mass incarceration." Former Attorney General Eric Holder has called on the U.S. Sentencing Commission to hold hearings to further consider the matter of risk assessment and prediction tools in sentencing and parole.\nThe objective – to reduce our massive over-incarceration in this country – is critical and noble. But risk assessment tools are simply the wrong way forward. I argue here that we should resist the political temptation to embrace the progressive argument for risk-prediction instruments because their use will unquestionably aggravate the already intolerable racial imbalance in our prison populations.\nThe fact is, risk today has collapsed into prior criminal history, and prior criminal history has become a proxy for race. The combination of these two trends means that using risk-assessment tools is going to significantly exacerbate the unacceptable racial disparities in our criminal justice system. More generally, the use of actuarial tools is likely to produce a "ratchet effect" on all members of the higher-risk categories – whether along racial or other lines – with highly detrimental consequences on their employment, educational, familial, and social outcomes. For these simple reasons, we should avoid embracing actuarial risk prediction and instead turn to race-neutral solutions to mass incarceration.\nThere are, to be sure, political and strategic advantages to using "technological" instruments, such as actuarial tools, to justify prison releases. Risk assessment tools protect political actors and serve to de-responsibilize decision makers. Given that we still today "govern through crime," these strategic considerations are undoubtedly important. But I think that this advantage is outweighed by the cost to racial justice. In the end, we need to find better solutions to reduce mass incarceration. Before making the argument, though, let me start here with a few cautionary tales about progressive arguments for prediction.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1525/fsr.2015.27.4.237

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Risk assessments that determine an individual's future dangerousness or likelihood for reoffending often rely on past criminal history, and people of color may appear disproportionately risky and deserving of more correctional oversight as a result of having been previously targeted for system intervention at disproportionately high rates.

    “For example, risk assessments that determine an individual ' s future dangerousness or likelihood for reoffending often rely on that individual ' s past criminal history, and people of color may appear disproportionately risky and deserving of more correctional oversight as a result of having been previously targeted for system intervention at disproportionately high rates”

    From A call to dismantle systemic racism in criminal legal systems. (2022) · cites this paper as Harcourt, 2015

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. J. Crim. L. & Criminology 474-90, 478 (1984). Id. at 479. Note that there was a similar, though less stark shift in prison admissions: "Across the six states, the... percen- tage of whites among prison admittees was also relatively stable, decreasing only from 57.6% in 1968 to 52.3% in 1978." Id.
  2. Clark Tibbitts, Success and Failure on Parole Can Be Predicted, 22 J. Crim. L. &Criminology 11, 11 (1931). 16 Id. at 43.
  3. U.S. Dep't of Justice, the Attorney General's Survey of Release Procedures, vol. 4, Parole, 541 (1939). 18 Harcourt, supra note 1.
  4. See John Pfaff, A Plea for More Aggregation: The Looming Threat to Empirical Legal Scholarship (July 16, 2010), avail- able at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1641435; John Pfaff, The Durability of Prison Populations, U. Chi. Legal F. 73 (2010).
  5. FEDERAL SENTENCING REPORTER • VOL. 27, NO. 4 • APRIL 2015

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Harcourt, B. E.
Affiliations
Columbia University (US)
Corresponding author
Harcourt, Bernard E.
Venue
Federal Sentencing Reporter
Published
2015-04-01
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
237-243
ISSN
  • 1053-9867 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-8363
OpenAlex
W2136889310
Cited by
210
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
25.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Federal Sentencing Reporter (publishedVersion)
  • bepress Legal Repository (submittedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Law and Policy
Keywords
risk assessment tools, mass incarceration, predictive policing, prior criminal history, prison admissions, prison population reduction, criminal justice reform

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