Null Effects of a Progressive Prosecution Policy on Marijuana Enforcement

Abstract

In the past decade, several U.S. prosecutors, elected on reform-oriented platforms, have implemented policies categorically declining to prosecute certain low-level offenses. These progressive prosecutors argue that their policies alleviate some of the disproportionate and racially biased consequences of broken windows policing. This article uses one case study to examine whether these policies affect the rate at which police make arrests for low-level crimes that prosecutors will decline to prosecute. With arrest and citation data from New York City, this article uses a differences-in-differences design to examine whether marijuana enforcement changed in Brooklyn as a result of District Attorney Ken Thompson’s 2014 decision not to prosecute low-level marijuana possession. This analysis finds a null effect of that policy upon the rates of arrest and citation for low-level and more serious marijuana possession crimes. Arrests, even without prosecution, serve important functions for police and bring weighty consequences for arrestees; this null effect raises questions about how closely linked the purposes of arrests and prosecutions are in the view of patrol officers. Moreover, these findings might prompt questions about the ability of prosecutors to enact effective reforms on their own, given the highly siloed nature of discretion in the U.S. criminal legal system.

Do progressive prosecutors increase crime? A quasi‐experimental analysis of crime rates in the 100 largest counties, 2000–2020

“…to the handful of studies on the topic (Agan et al, 2021a;Goldrosen, 2022;Hogan, 2022;Kaplan et al, 2022).…”

“…In this hyper‐partisan environment, employing evidence‐based criminal justice policies is more critical than ever. This study seeks to aid such efforts and move the debate about progressive prosecution policies and crime forward by adding to the handful of studies on the topic (Agan et al., 2021a; Goldrosen, 2022; Hogan, 2022; Kaplan et al., 2022).…”

“…Yet, two investigating the effects of non-prosecution of non-violent misdemeanors-a common progressive reform-on individual-level recidivism rates found that non-prosecution decreased the likelihood of reoffending (Agan et al, 2021b;Owusu, 2022). Likewise, Goldrosen's (2022) analysis of progressive marijuana policies on drug arrests in Brooklyn, NY, revealed that the implementation of this policy did not significantly affect marijuana possession arrest rates. 4 While Hogan (2022) uses the "progressive" classification as a proxy for de-prosecution policies, others have used this classification to identify progressive prosecutors (e.g., Foglesong et al, 2022), and his results have sparked debates about the relationship between progressive prosecutors and crime (e.g., Foglesong et al, 2022;Hogan, 2023;Kajeepeta, 2022;Kaplan et al, 2022).…”

“…Yet, two investigating the effects of non‐prosecution of non‐violent misdemeanors—a common progressive reform—on individual‐level recidivism rates found that non‐prosecution decreased the likelihood of reoffending (Agan et al., 2021b; Owusu, 2022). Likewise, Goldrosen's (2022) analysis of progressive marijuana policies on drug arrests in Brooklyn, NY, revealed that the implementation of this policy did not significantly affect marijuana possession arrest rates.…”