What Were 'They' Thinking, and Does It Matter? Structural Inequality and Individual Intent in Criminal Justice Reform

30 Pages Posted: 20 Jun 2019 Last revised: 23 Oct 2019

Date Written: June 14, 2019

Abstract

In Visions of Social Control (1985) Stanley Cohen provided a typology of scholarly works on the punitive turn: “uneven progress”, “good intentions-disastrous consequences”, and “discipline and mystification.” This essay applies these categories to recent punishment and society scholarship, finding a clear preference for the third category, arguing that current works do not merely point to systemic evils—they impute bad intent to individuals in the system. Against this current, I identify two works—James Forman’s Locking Up Our Own (2017) and Heather Schoenfeld’s Building the Prison State (2016)—and show the strengths of analyses that take individual actors on their own terms. Finally, relying on the recent example of the Ban-the-Box policy—a well-intended but failed policy—I argue that flexibility in viewing actors’ motivations, rather than relegating them to the role of cogs in a system fraught by inherent flaws, is important not only for scholarly accuracy but for policy and strategic reasons.

Keywords: punishment, intent, mass incarceration, ban the box

JEL Classification: k

Suggested Citation

Aviram, Hadar, What Were 'They' Thinking, and Does It Matter? Structural Inequality and Individual Intent in Criminal Justice Reform (June 14, 2019). Law and Social Inquiry, Forthcoming, UC Hastings Research Paper No. 362, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3404312

Hadar Aviram (Contact Author)

UC Hastings Law ( email )

200 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
61
Abstract Views
439
rank
474,118
PlumX Metrics