Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1814006
 


 



Perceptions of Fairness and Justice: The Shared Aims & Occasional Conflicts of Legitimacy and Moral Credibility


Josh Bowers


University of Virginia School of Law

Paul H. Robinson


University of Pennsylvania Law School

2012

Wake Forest Law Review, Vol. 47, Pg. 211, 2012
University of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 11-13

Abstract:     
A growing literature on procedural fairness suggests that there is practical value in enhancing a criminal justice system's "legitimacy" with the community it governs by adopting and implementing fair enforcement practices and adjudicative procedures. A separate literature suggests that there is practical value in enhancing the system's "moral credibility" with the community by distributing criminal liability and punishment according to principles that track the community's shared intuitions of justice. In this Article, we examine the shared aims and the similarities in the operation and effect of these two criminal justice dynamics as well as the occasional differences in effect and potential for conflict. By comparing the two dynamics, the article moves forward debates that – though rich and important – have grown stagnant. Specifically, legal scholars have tended to invoke the two dynamics too casually, to ignore one but not the other, or to conflate or confuse the two. This article provides a useful and necessary analytic framework for further exploration into the advantages and limits of moral credibility and legitimacy. Finally, the article stakes out tentative positions within the on-going debates. That is, it endorses the prevailing view that moral credibility and legitimacy are promising – indeed, critical – systemic enterprises that may carry significant crime-control advantages, and the article concludes that – for empirical and theoretic reasons – moral credibility ought to be the principal objective in uncommon circumstances in which a system may effectively pursue only one.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 76

Keywords: criminal law & procedure, empirical research, exclusionary rule, policing, stop & frisk, search & seizure, profiling, plea bargaining, criminalization, justification, excuse, nonexculpatory, culpability, offense grading, deference, compliance, deterrence, preventive detention, duties, legitimate

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: November 10, 2011 ; Last revised: August 1, 2012

Suggested Citation

Bowers, Josh and Robinson, Paul H., Perceptions of Fairness and Justice: The Shared Aims & Occasional Conflicts of Legitimacy and Moral Credibility (2012). Wake Forest Law Review, Vol. 47, Pg. 211, 2012; University of Penn Law School, Public Law Research Paper No. 11-13. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1814006 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1814006

Contact Information

Josh Bowers
University of Virginia School of Law ( email )
580 Massie Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
United States
Paul H. Robinson (Contact Author)
University of Pennsylvania Law School ( email )
3501 Sansom Street
Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 4,050
Downloads: 386
Download Rank: 42,322

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.234 seconds