The Collateral Consequence Conundrum: Comparative Genealogy, Current Trends, and Future Scenarios

Corda, Alessandro

doi:10.1108/s1059-433720180000077004

Cited by 13 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…European “ancillary penalties” are determined by courts and imposed on a case-by-case basis as part of an offender’s sentence. In contrast, U.S. courts have largely determined collateral consequences to be civil in nature and not subject to criminal due process considerations, and they are imposed upon entire classes of felons in a blanket manner (Corda, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public opinion and the politics of collateral consequence policies

Johnston

Wozniak

2020

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We analyze data from a national sample of the U.S. population to assess public support for policies that deny former offenders’ access to job training programs, food stamps, and public housing. We find that Americans generally oppose benefit restrictions, though support for these policies is higher among Republicans and people with higher levels of racial resentment. We also find that a legislator’s criminal justice reform positions generally do not significantly affect voters’ evaluation of him or her, and even voters with more punitive attitudes toward collateral consequence policies support legislators who advance particular kinds of reform proposals. These findings provide little evidence that any group of Americans would be mobilized to vote against a legislator who works to reform collateral consequence policies. We discuss the implications of these findings for American and comparative studies of the politics of punishment.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public opinion and the politics of collateral consequence policies

Johnston

Wozniak

2020

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Garland, 2020: 324-325) Garland (2013: 479) also discusses how an American criminal record is 'more public, more permanent, and more consequential than it is in other nations', resulting in 'potential employers, landlords, and others [being] legally permitted to discriminate against an individual on the basis of his or her prior convictions, or on the basis of prior arrests, even when these were for minor offenses or offenses that occurred many years previously'. As German-born Nora Demleitner (1999Demleitner ( , 2000Demleitner ( , 2018 points out, collateral sanctions of criminal convictions have historically been known in Europe too but, especially as a result of the codification and penal reform processes during the 19th and 20th centuries, they have gradually become, compared to the United States, 'more narrowly targeted, less comprehensive, usually imposed directly and publicly, not retroactive, and time-limited' (Demleitner, 2018: 512; see also Corda, 2018b;Damaška, 1968). At the same time, some of the recent developments in Europe are not ignored, with criminal background checks growing in scope and formally non-punitive disqualifications expanding in number within the Old Continent (Demleitner, 2018: 488; see also Corda and Kaspar, 2022).…”

Section: Ccs In the American Penal Exceptionalism Debatementioning

confidence: 99%

Collateral consequences of criminal records from the other side of the pond: How exceptional is American penal exceptionalism?

Corda

Rovira

Henley

2023

Criminology & Criminal Justice

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we highlight the existence and expansion of so-called ‘collateral consequences’ (CCs) of criminal records in Europe to challenge the prevalent view that these are features of the claimed ‘American exceptionalism’ within the penal field. First, we consider how CCs have been widely presented as a quintessential example of American penal exceptionalism within extant scholarship before problematising the adoption of such a framework from a European perspective. Second, we demystify the issue of CCs within Europe by highlighting the deleterious effects which CCs have on the lives of European people with a criminal record. Third, we consider precisely what can be regarded as ‘exceptional’ about CCs in the United States as compared to Europe by analysing key areas of possible differentiation. We conclude by cautioning against the view that European penality is necessarily – and always homogeneously and consistently – ‘progressive’ in relation to its treatment of criminal records and criminal record subjects. We also suggest that far greater attention and vigilance is required from criminologists and criminal justice scholars regarding the expansion and operation of CCs in Europe.

show abstract

“…An extensive literature has addressed collateral consequences of conviction in recent years, particularly in the United States (e.g. Corda, 2018; Kirk and Wakefield, 2018). There are, however, relatively few studies on the Canadian case, despite the substantial impact that collateral consequences have on many Canadians (Canadian Bar Association, 2017; Canadian Civil Liberties Association, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigating and bordering: The dual nature of Canadian collateral consequences of conviction

Dao

2023

Criminology & Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Roughly, 13% of Canada’s adult population has some kind of criminal record. Collateral consequences stemming from a criminal record are wide-ranging, from formal restrictions to more informal forms of exclusions. In this article, I argue that Canada exhibits a distinct and dual approach with regard to collateral consequences. A commitment to principles, such as human dignity, rehabilitation, proportionality and individualisation in sentencing, especially by the courts, has increasingly mitigated the impact of collateral consequences in many areas. Yet, these interventions to limit collateral consequences have been far more uncommon for immigration-related collateral consequences, where the impact of a criminal conviction has only expanded in the last decades. This suggests the centrality of the criminalisation of migration in Canada’s bordering regime and its role in drawing boundaries between desirable and undesirable migrants. This dual nature of collateral consequences also sends a message about who is, and who is not, deserving of second chances.

show abstract

The Collateral Consequence Conundrum: Comparative Genealogy, Current Trends, and Future Scenarios

Cited by 13 publications

References 47 publications

Public opinion and the politics of collateral consequence policies

Public opinion and the politics of collateral consequence policies

Collateral consequences of criminal records from the other side of the pond: How exceptional is American penal exceptionalism?

Mitigating and bordering: The dual nature of Canadian collateral consequences of conviction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About