No abstract

The politicization of crime challenges theoretical and empirical criminology, while drawing the discipline into politics of criminal social control. This complication and complicity is considered in the case of state organized race crime, and especially its "slow violence", where victimization is attritional, dispersed, and hidden. Criminology is not merely compromised here-or limited in theoretical and empirical reach-but complicit, contributing to under-regulated racial violence rationalized in large part by the criminalization of race. The discipline might contribute to increased understanding of state organized race crime, and lessen its role therein, with greater commitments to critical race research and teaching. Downloaded from 2 Theoretical Criminology inviting debate over how the discipline might both illuminate and extricate itself from the reproduction of state organized racial violence.This essay considers the "slow violence" of state organized race crime, where harms are more attritional, dispersed, and hidden. While criminological theory and research rarely engage with this slow violence, in part due to its ephemeral nature, they contribute to its occurrence and under-regulation by rationalizing the criminalization of race.

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.

Increasing racial group representation among justice professionals is considered a potential remedy to inequality in the administration of justice, including racial disparities in sentencing. Research shows mixed effects of decision maker race on sentencing. Most studies focus exclusively on the significance of individual judges' status characteristics, however, failing to consider racial group representation among other court actors. The authors consider whether such representation within and across multiple categories of court workers—judges, prosecutors, defense lawyers, and probation officers—relates to federal sentencing out comes. Findings reveal that the effect of defendant race on imprisonment decisions differs across judicial districts and is influenced by variable levels of black workforce representation. Specifically, districts with greater black representation among prosecutors are distinguished by more racially equitable odds of incar ceration. Conversely, increased black representation among probation officers is associated with greater disparity between the sentences of blacks and whites.

As violence and crime within and around U.S. schools has drawn increased attention to school security, police, surveillance cameras, and other measures have grown commonplace at public schools. Social scientists commonly voice concern that exclusionary security measures are most common in schools attended by poor and non-White students, yet there is little empirical basis for assessing the extent of differential exposure, as we lack research on how exclusionary measures are distributed relative to school and student characteristics. To address this gap in the research, we use nationally representative school-level data from the School Survey on Crime and Safety to consider the security measures employed in elementary, middle, and high schools. Results indicate that while security measures are ubiquitous in U.S. high schools, those considered more exclusionary are concentrated in elementary, middle, and high schools attended by non-White and/or poorer students.