A Multilevel Test of the Racial Threat Hypothesis in One State’s Juvenile Court

Abstract

Noting the paucity of research on the racial threat hypothesis in the juvenile courts, this study examined the interplay of defendant characteristics and country-level characteristics on dispositions. Data were retrieved from the Department of Juvenile Justice files in South Carolina and were analyzed using multinomial logistic hierarchical linear modeling. Results revealed support for the racial threat hypothesis, as racial inequity operated in a different manner (more punitively) for Black defendants. Larger Black populations in counties also led to an increased use of punitive sanctions. In addition, concentrated disadvantage effects were found, and heightened levels of teenage population led to higher incarceration rates for Black defendants. Limitations of this study, implications for stakeholders/practitioners, and directions for future research are discussed.

Plea Bargains Among Serious and Violent Girls: An Intersectional Approach Exploring Race in the Juvenile Court

“…The interaction of these variables situated on different planes (individual, group, and structural) comes to define the culpability and perceived femininity of a juvenile, thus affecting the adjudication outcome (Maggard et al, 2013; Moore & Padavic, 2010). As Crenshaw (1995) and Bloom (1996) point out, the construction of a “traditionally feminine” and therefore less blameworthy female offender is both a race and poverty (both economic and perceived “moral”) issue, but this may also be moderated by structural and group/cultural elements, such as living in a violent and/or impoverished area (Lowery et al, 2016). In other words, girls are marginalized further for perceived violations of normative expectations (Pollack, 2000).…”

“…These are important findings in light of some research which has noted that sanction severity for juveniles is linked to future offending (Huizinga, Schumann, Ehret, & Elliott, 2003), which, for example, may disproportionately fall on minority offenders (Leiber & Fox, 2005). In fact, the cumulative consequences of racial disparities in juvenile justice as the life course progresses are well documented, and may be found at the intake process, plea process, and sentencing (Engen, Steen, & Bridges, 2002; Frazier & Cochran, 1986; Leiber & Johnson, 2008; Lowery, Burrow, & Kaminski, 2016; Rodriguez, 2010; Thomas et al, 2013).…”

Neighborhood Disproportion in Juvenile Justice Contact

“…As such, the studies which we review regarding geographic disparities all analyze units of geography smaller than municipalities. We do not address literature on geographic disparities in juvenile justice contact at other levels, such as between counties (e.g., Freiburger & Jordan, 2011;Leiber, Peck, & Rodriguez, 2016;Lowery, Burrow, & Kaminski, 2018;Thomas, Moak, & Walker, 2013).…”

What Context Matters and at What Level? A Test of Racial/Ethnic Threat, Symbolic Threat, and Structural Inequality Perspectives in Juvenile Court Decision-Making

“…Numerous studies have examined the influence of race and, to a lesser extent, ethnicity on juvenile justice decision-making (Bishop & Frazier; 1988; Fader, Kurlycheck, & Morgan, 2014; Lowery, Burrow, & Kaminski, 2018; Maroun, 2019; Peck & Jennings, 2016). Although a few studies report no or minimal race or ethnicity effects (Caudill, Morris, Sayed, Yun, & DeLisi, 2013; Tracy 2005; Wilbanks, 1987), most find that race and ethnicity impact juvenile court proceedings (e.g.…”