Bias In, Bias Out

84 Pages Posted: 1 Oct 2018 Last revised: 22 Jun 2019

See all articles by Sandra G. Mayson

Sandra G. Mayson

University of Georgia School of Law

Date Written: September 28, 2018

Abstract

Police, prosecutors, judges, and other criminal justice actors increasingly use algorithmic risk assessment to estimate the likelihood that a person will commit future crime. As many scholars have noted, these algorithms tend to have disparate racial impact. In response, critics advocate three strategies of resistance: (1) the exclusion of input factors that correlate closely with race, (2) adjustments to algorithmic design to equalize predictions across racial lines, and (3) rejection of algorithmic methods altogether.

This Article’s central claim is that these strategies are at best superficial and at worst counterproductive, because the source of racial inequality in risk assessment lies neither in the input data, nor in a particular algorithm, nor in algorithmic methodology. The deep problem is the nature of prediction itself. All prediction looks to the past to make guesses about future events. In a racially stratified world, any method of prediction will project the inequalities of the past into the future. This is as true of the subjective prediction that has long pervaded criminal justice as of the algorithmic tools now replacing it. What algorithmic risk assessment has done is reveal the inequality inherent in all prediction, forcing us to confront a much larger problem than the challenges of a new technology. Algorithms shed new light on an old problem.

Ultimately, the Article contends, redressing racial disparity in prediction will require more fundamental changes in the way the criminal justice system conceives of and responds to risk. The Article argues that criminal law and policy should, first, more clearly delineate the risks that matter, and, second, acknowledge that some kinds of risk may be beyond our ability to measure without racial distortion—in which case they cannot justify state coercion. To the extent that we can reliably assess risk, on the other hand, criminal system actors should strive to respond to risk with support rather than restraint whenever possible. Counterintuitively, algorithmic risk assessment could be a valuable tool in a system that targets the risky for support.

Keywords: criminal justice, algorithms, prediction, criminal law, risk assessment, bail reform, race, minorities, discrimination, civil rights, COMPAS, rearrest, inequality

JEL Classification: K14, K42

Suggested Citation

Mayson, Sandra Gabriel, Bias In, Bias Out (September 28, 2018). 128 Yale Law Journal 2218 (2019),; University of Georgia School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2018-35. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3257004

Sandra Gabriel Mayson (Contact Author)

University of Georgia School of Law ( email )

225 Herty Drive
Athens, GA 30602
United States

HOME PAGE: http://www.law.uga.edu/profile/sandra-g-mayson

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
782
Abstract Views
4,338
rank
30,494
PlumX Metrics