Jonathan Simons Mass Incarceration On Trial

This paper discusses three critical issues in the criminal justice system. It touches on the general issues of punishment philosophies, sentence decision making, and prison overcrowding and focused more specifically on the negative effects of each. Highlighted in this informational paper is the interrelated nature of the issues; each issue affects and is affected by the others. Data and information has been gathered from the FBI Uniform Crime Report, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Amnesty International, the NAACP Legal Defense

Ever since the first prison opened in the United States in 1790, incarceration has been the center of the nations criminal justice system. Over this 200 year period many creative alternatives to incarceration have been tried, and many at a much lower cost than imprisonment. It wasn’t until the late 1980’s when our criminal justice systems across the country began experiencing a problem with overcrowding of facilities. This problem forced lawmakers to develop new options for sentencing criminal offenders.

The Three Strike Law was one of the outcomes of the constant push by the corporations within the prison industrial complex. It is one of the leading reasons for the growing incarceration rate. Policies and hidden motives of high authorities in the US government have shown that the demographic being targeted, for the most part, are poor Black Men. Which explains for the imbalance of races in prisons today, with Blacks being imprisoned as the

In, “The Caging of America”, by Adam Gopnik explains the problems in the in the American criminal justice system focusing more on the prison system. Some of the struggles that Gopnik states in his article are mass incarceration, crime rate, and judges giving long inappropriate sentencings to those with minor crimes. He demonstrates that inmates are getting treated poorly than helping them learn from their actions. Using facts and statistics, Gopnik makes his audience realize that there is an urgent need of change in the American prison system. The main idea of Gopnik’s article is that the prison system needs to improve its sentencing laws because prisons are getting over crowed. Gopnik’s argument is valid because there is a problem in the sentencing laws that has caused a malfunction in the prison system as a whole.

The United States prison population has grown seven-fold over the past forty years, and many Americans today tend to believe that the high levels of incarceration in our country stem from factors such as racism, socioeconomic differences, and drugs. While these factors have contributed to the incarceration rate present in our country today, I argue that the most important reason our country has such a high incarceration rate is the policy changes that have occurred since the 1970s. During this time, the United States has enacted policy changes that have produced an astounding rise in the use of imprisonment for social control. These policy changes were enacted in order to achieve greater consistency, certainty, and severity and include sentencing laws such as determinate sentencing, truth-in-sentencing, mandatory minimum sentencing, and three strikes laws (National Research Council 2014). Furthermore, I argue that mandatory sentencing has had the most significant effect on the incarceration rate.

Over the past few decades, the United States has witnessed a huge surge in the number of individuals in jail and in prison. Evidence suggests the mass imprisonment policy from the last 40 years was a horrible catastrophe. Putting more people in prison not only ruined lives, it disrupted families, prevented ex-prisoners to find housing, to get an education, or even a good job. Regrettably, the United States has a higher percent of its population incarcerated than any other country. America is responsible for a quarter of the world’s inmates, and its incarceration rate is increasing exponentially. The expense produced by these overcrowded prisons cost the country a substantial amount of money every year. Although people are incarcerated for a number of reasons, the country’s prisons are focused on punishment rather than reform, and the result is a misguided system that fails to rehabilitate criminals or discourage crime. By researching mass incarceration, I hope to get society to understand that incarcerating an individual not only effects the family, but we will look at the long term consequences on society and how the United States can remain safe and, at the same time, undo much of the damage that results from large-scale imprisonment.

Mass incarceration has been an issue in the United States since the start of the War on Drugs, because of the political agenda attached to the “tough on crime” regimen thousands of people have suffered as a consequence. The solution to this is one that can only be possibly solved by approaching through several angles. The ten steps presented by Michael Tonry, are an innovative and have merit to some extent. However, mass incarceration results from more than unjust sentencing laws, which is his main focus. If ever we are to resolve the issue, society and the criminal justice system must come together to completely reevaluate what we consider to be “tough on crime” and redefine the purpose of prisons, strictly punishment or rehabilitation. The focus has to shift from harsh sentencing, stigma, racial discrimination to a basic form of rehabilitation and reduction of the prison system in general. The criminal justice system has to do what they are actually meant to do and focus on rehabilitation measures, and when possible completely stop interaction with the prison system all together.

Mass Incarceration is a predicament in the U.S. because in the land of the free, there are more than two million people in prison. Prisons are homes to the majority of twenty-two percent of the U.S. population. The U.S. has a massive incarceration rate, seven hundred and sixteen per every one hundred thousand. The U.S. makes five percent of the world’s population and the third country in which most people live in but number one incarcerating humans.

The U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged the growing distress, deeming California’s state prisons unconstitutionally crowded. In 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled out that California’s 33 state prisons have become too overcrowded to the point where there are no sufficient medical and mental health care available (Realignment AB 109, 2013). The U.S. Supreme Court determined that the 33 state prisons are violating constitutional exclusions, under the Eighth Amendment, against unfamiliar punishment and brutality, says the American Legislative Exchange Council, an American organization producing model policies for state legislators (ALEC, 2010).

Mass incarceration is the inhumane process by which people are cornered into the criminal “justice” system and recognized as criminals and felons. Criminals in the United States tend to receive longer sentences than those in other countries, even when they commit the same crimes. Furthermore, once these individuals are released

Mass incarceration is a term primarily associated with the United States of America’s policy trends beginning around the 1970’s. During that time, there is a dramatic shift in the rhetoric regarding crime, causing a wave of policy changes that have set the course for the United States’ current 2.3 million people incarcerated. In California in 1976, then Governor Brown followed this trend and

The United States Supreme Court ruled that prison overcrowding in California was equivalent to cruel and unusual punishment. This decision recharged a long-standing disagreement among scholars and politicians as to whether or not courts should intervene to protect make changes. Some believe this is a matter or the well-being of those unable to make decisions for themselves. Others believe this is not a top priority and by forcing states to improve state institutions, the already costly industry will have cost increase. The journal also discusses the economic effects reform has had. Concluding that they have made positive changes at a slightly higher expense. The changes made by the state made the facilities closer to “humane” by court standards. (7)

In the eyes of many, mass incarceration constitutes a brutal technique of punishing individuals for excessive periods of time. There are many reasons to be doubtful that the system of mass incarceration has helped the nation in any form. Rather, locking up millions of people for nonviolent crimes seems just too excessive and redundant. According to “The Black Family in the Age of Mass Incarceration” by Ta-Nehisi Coates published in The Atlantic magazine, the majority of those incarcerated are minorities mainly African American. More clearly, the technique of mass incarceration is used to limit the numbers of minorities in society or control the minority population. Regulations regarding incarcerating millions must be reviewed thoroughly on a federal level and refine precedent to a better future. What major actions must be taken into account to change the turmoil of mass incarceration? Is it possible to adjust the law in reparation for a better future?

In America’s tough economic society, over population has become an exceedingly hot topic issue. However, overcrowding in America’s prison system has been a severe problem since the 1970's. The majority of the changes have come from different policies on what demographic to imprison and for what reason. The perspective of locking up criminals because they are "evil" is what spawned this (Allen, 2008). Because of this perspective the prison system in America is in need of serious reorganization. Since 1980, most states have one or more of their prisons or the entire system under orders from the federal courts to maintain minimum constitutional standards (Stewart, 2006).

While lawful incarceration deprives prisoners of most of Americas Constitutional rights, they do maintain a few constitutional rights. Federal courts, while hesitant to impede with the internal administration of prisons, will interfere to rectify violations of the constitutional rights that prisoners are still entitled to. A prison guideline that oversteps on a prisoner’s constitutional rights is lawful only if it is reasonably related to the safety of the inmates or the rehabilitation of that prisoner.