research topics about the criminal justice system

135+ Amazing Criminal Justice Research Topics In 2023

Are you a law student or enrolled in law college? Are you looking for criminal justice research topics? Here, in this blog, you can find your criminal justice research topics. Statanalytca.com explains the 135 amazing criminal research paper topic ideas for 2023 in this blog.

When we listen to the word criminal justice, many words come into our mind like “victim,” “enforcement,” “crimes,” “courts,” “prison,” and law sanctions. Criminal justice is a term that governments make to justice for people, reduce and make decisions to prevent crimes. Governments make law sanctions to reduce crimes. Every country has a different criminal justice system.

The criminal justice system in the United States is a complex system of federal, state, and local laws, with state and federal constitutions, international treaties, and customary law. Each layer of government shares responsibility for a different aspect of the process. Federal law enforcement agencies enforce laws that may be broken by people who are not in their jurisdiction.

For example : When an individual from New York City travels to Florida to commit a crime such as a robbery or murder they will be arrested by the Florida police and handed over to federal authorities.

A criminal justice research paper necessarily requires accuracy, attention, and patience. Sometimes students are confused about writing criminal research paper topics, or they have a shortage of time to complete research papers.

Most college students ask for assignments to write criminal justice research papers. If you want criminal justice research paper help, you can take our trusted  research paper assignment help .

How To Choose A Good Research Topics

Table of Contents

Choosing a research topic is a very challenging task. You should pick a topic that is both interesting and relevant to your audience. You should analyze the crime report before choosing the criminal justice research topics. Research the types of crimes in your country and where your country ranks in the global crime index.

Some research topics include the following:

• The role of law enforcement, prosecutors, and public defenders.
• Challenges with eyewitness identifications.
• Different types of evidence are used in criminal cases.
• The effect of jury selection on trials.
• How criminal justice impacts mental health.

What Is a Research Paper in Criminal Justice?

A research paper in criminal justice is an academic paper presenting findings from research on a specific criminal justice topic. These papers typically require extensive research and analysis of primary and secondary sources, such as case studies, official reports, statistics, and academic literature. The research paper aims to contribute new knowledge to the criminal justice field, identify trends or patterns, or assess the effectiveness of interventions or policies.

Research papers in criminal justice typically follow a standard academic format, including an introduction that sets the context and research questions, a literature review that summarizes existing research, a methodology section that outlines the research design and data collection methods, a results section that presents findings, and a conclusion that summarizes the research’s significance and implications.

Criminal justice research papers may focus on various topics, including the legal system’s operations, law enforcement practices, corrections, crime prevention, and victimization. These papers may be used to inform policymakers, practitioners, and academics about the state of the criminal justice system and suggest evidence-based solutions to improve its effectiveness and fairness.

Let’s Discuss The Criminal Justice Research Topics-

Here in this section, we will tell you some of the best criminal justice research topics for 2023:-

Basic Criminology and Criminal Justice Research Topics

• Basic criminal Research Topics.
• History of Criminal Ethics.
• Criminology as Social Science.
• Criminology and Public Policy.
• Advantages of Private Prisons.
• Civil Crimes vs War Crimes.
• Offenses Against Religion & Cultural Traits.
• Causes of victimization.

Court Cases Criminal Justice Research Topics

• Can victims of crime receive help?
• How serious are shoplifting incidents?
• When do felony disenfranchisement laws apply?
• Is organized crime and corruption synonymous?
• What is legal help available to victims of date rape?
• What is the difference between civil and criminal cases?
• Forensic science: how effective is it in modern criminal justice?
• Is there a link between substance abuse, crime, and substance use?
• Who is eligible for the protection program, and what protection is provided?
• Prison rape and violence: What can be done to prevent sexual and domestic violence in prison?

Controversial Criminal Justice Research Topics

• Gun control causes.
• Struggle with mental health issues.
• Police officers’ legal rights are limited.
• College Violence Causes.
• Gun violence and prevention policies.
• Crimes Propaganda and Modern Music Culture.
• Race and politics of criminal justice.
• An investigation into victim services.
• Eyewitness Evidence Importance.
• Legal codes used in America.
• Zero tolerance policy and crime rates.
• Sexual assault.
• culture, and gender equality.
• What is the best way to reduce recidivism?
• pros and cons of prisons in America.
• Criminalization of poverty.
• Gender and Punishment.
• The effects of drugs on children’s development.
• Effects of drug addiction on mental health.
• Youth offenders and Bootcamps.

Debate Criminal Justice Research Topics

• Failures in criminal justice.
• Criminal justice system expectations.
• Statistical analysis in criminal justice.
• Debate on criminal justice act.
• criminal justice trend evaluation.
• Trends in the criminal justice system.
• Criminal justice system corrections in the USA.
• Find the solution to prevent crimes.

Criminology Research Topics On Theories

• Is employment related to law violations?
• What is the relationship between family status and legal violations?
• Is gender related to the type of law violation?
• What is the relationship between citizenship and law enforcement?
• How does education relate to crime levels?
• How does gun ownership relate to breaking the law?
• Is there a link between immigration status and law violations?
• What types of crimes are common at what ages?
• How does the type of crime relate to the level of aggression?

Top 10 Hot Criminology Research Topics

• Crime is explained culturally.
• The media’s role in criminology.
• The advantages of convict criminology.
• The major issues in postmodern criminology.
• Is politics influencing criminal behavior?
• How does DAWN collect information?
• The shortcomings of crime mapping.
• Crime rates and community deterioration.
• Certain personality traits trigger criminal behavior.
• Does experimental criminology have an impact on social policy?

Criminal Justice Research Topics Based On Crime and Communities

• The impact of community policing on crime prevention in urban areas.
• The effectiveness of restorative justice programs in reducing recidivism rates.
• The relationship between poverty and crime in urban communities.
• The role of race and ethnicity in criminal justice outcomes and disparities.
• The effectiveness of community-based interventions in reducing juvenile delinquency.
• The impact of gun laws on violent crime in urban communities.
• Social media’s role in spreading crime and its effects on communities.
• The effectiveness of drug courts in reducing drug-related crimes and improving public safety.
• The relationship between mental illness and criminal behavior in urban communities.
• The impact of immigration policies on crime and public safety in urban areas.
• The effectiveness of re-entry programs for ex-offenders in reducing recidivism and promoting successful reintegration into society.
• The impact of community-based victim services on the criminal justice system and crime prevention.
• The relationship between neighborhood social disorganization and crime rates.
• The role of technology in improving crime prevention and solving crimes in urban communities.
• The effectiveness of community-based diversion programs for non-violent offenders.
• The impact of neighborhood watch programs on crime prevention and community safety.
• The role of community involvement in addressing hate crimes and bias incidents.
• The impact of domestic violence on communities and the criminal justice response.
• The effectiveness of drug treatment programs in reducing drug-related crime and improving public health.
• The criminal justice system’s impact on marginalized communities and efforts to promote equity and justice.

Criminal Justice Research Topics On Racism and Discrimination

• Eliminating discrimination in the criminal justice system.
• Gender Bias in Eyewitnesses.
• African American Legislative Apartheid.
• Racial Discrimination in College Campuses.
• How criminal justice law is enacted on Migrants.
• Inequality in the criminal justice system Research.

General Criminal Justice Research Topics

• Police brutality and excessive force
• Criminal profiling and investigation techniques
• Restorative justice programs
• Cybercrime and cyberterrorism
• Gun control policies and their effectiveness
• The impact of race and ethnicity on sentencing
• Juvenile delinquency prevention and intervention
• Wrongful convictions and the death penalty
• Gender and crime
• Drug policy and its impact on crime.
• Community policing and trust-building strategies
• The effectiveness of rehabilitation and reentry programs for offenders
• Domestic violence and its impact on victims
• Crime prevention through environmental design
• Forensic science and the reliability of evidence in criminal investigations
• Corruption in law enforcement and the criminal justice system
• Mental health treatment for inmates and offenders
• Human trafficking and modern-day slavery
• The use of technology in criminal investigations and surveillance
• The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the criminal justice system.

Types of Criminal Justice Research Topics  

• Homicide, serial murders, and serial murder are the most popular topics in murder studies.
• A case study of robbery crime, unusual daylight robbery in a news article.
• Identity Theft and Ways to Protect, the prevalence of identity theft in the community, causes, and effects of cell phone theft.
• Analysis and critique of Current fraud cases, Fraud and business ethics, fraud schemes, and investigation.

International Criminal Law Topics

• Criminal ethics, criminal law research assignment paper.
• Criminal courtroom observation reaction.
• Childhood obesity.
• Crime Prevention.
• International crimes and their laws.
• International criminal court.
• Human Rights and Inequality.
• Rape Cases.

Criminal Justice Research Topics For College Students

• The Impact of Police Body Cameras on Law Enforcement Accountability
• Violent Crime Reduction Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Programs
• Racial Disparities in Sentencing and Their Implications for Justice
• The Role of Mental Health Services in Diverting Offenders from the Criminal Justice System
• Media Effects on Perceptions of Crime and Criminal Conduct
• Examining the Use of Technology in Solving Crimes and Enhancing Investigations
• Juvenile Justice Policies: Rehabilitation vs. Punishment
• The Intersection of Immigration Policies and Criminal Justice Outcomes
• Criminal Profiling and its Reliability in Solving Crimes
• The Effect of Minimum Sentence Laws on Incarceration Rates and Public Safety.

Criminology Research Topics

• Armed Crime Groups History Motives.
• Cyber Criminology Correction Methods.
• Art Fraud Cooperation.
• Drunk Driving Prevention Ads.
• Identity Theft & Social Media.
• Topic on Child Abuse & TV Violence.
• Aggression Against Homeless People.
• Unemployment & Street Situation Analysis.
• Forensic Research Identification Methods.
• Crime Witnesses PTSD Rehabilitation.

Career With The Criminology Major

There are a variety of jobs you can get with a criminology degree. We sort listed the top 8 trending jobs that you can get with a criminology degree:

• Criminologist.
• Private investigator 
• Forensic scientist .
• Correction officer.
• Jury consultant.
• Loss prevention specialist 
• Clinical social worker.

Tips On How To Write Criminal Justice Research Topics

A step-by-step guide on how to write criminal justice research topics:

• Choose a particular topic.
• Read the given materials and take some notes.
• Come up with a thesis.
• Create an outline for your project.
• Write down all the information that you have collected.
• Start with a cover page, and an intro.
• List the technique you used and the results you got.
• Include a discussion.
• Always write a conclusion.
• Don’t forget to correct your grammar mistakes.
• Revise, proofread, and if it is incorrect then edit.

Importance of Criminal Justice Research Papers In 2023

Here are some important of criminal justice research papers in 2023: 

1. Informed Policy-Making

Criminal justice research papers provide valuable data and insights that policymakers use to develop effective laws and policies, enhancing the fairness and efficiency of the justice system.

2. Evidence-Based Practices

Research papers help identify evidence-based strategies for law enforcement, corrections, and crime prevention, leading to better outcomes and reduced rates of reoffending.

3. Transparency and Accountability

By revealing systemic issues and gaps, research papers push for greater transparency and accountability within the criminal justice system, fostering public trust.

4. Improved Decision-Making

Policymakers, law enforcement, and other stakeholders use research findings to make informed decisions on resource allocation and allocation of efforts.

5. Advancing Knowledge

Criminal justice research papers contribute to the body of knowledge in the field, allowing researchers and academics to build on existing findings and develop innovative approaches to understanding crime and justice.

6. Addressing Disparities

Research papers shed light on disparities in the justice system, such as racial or socioeconomic disparities, prompting efforts to address and rectify these inequalities.

7. Enhancing Public Awareness

Research papers raise public awareness about issues like wrongful convictions, mental health challenges, and the impact of crime on communities, spurring advocacy and societal change.

Get More Criminal Justice Research Topics At Statanalytica.com

Hope you choose criminal justice research topics for this blog. If you have any difficulty choosing criminal justice research topics, you can contact us at any time. Our professional writers are available to suggest criminal justice research topics ideas and research paper help.

Here are some of the benefits of taking criminal justice research topics that you can hire us.

• Professional Guidance.
• Improvement in Grades.
• A Better Understanding of the Subject.
• 24 Hours Availability.
• On-time Delivery.
• Free Corrections.
• Money-Back Guarantee.
• Affordable Deals.

So, you can contact us for any type of paper writing service and impress your teacher or professor by choosing a good criminal justice research topic.

This is the end of this post about criminal justice research topics. However, diverse criminal justice research topics offer unique insights into various aspects of the criminal justice system. These research areas are crucial for policymakers, practitioners, and academics to comprehensively understand the system’s challenges and develop effective interventions that improve its fairness and effectiveness. 

On the other hand, we mentioned more than 135 criminal justice research topics based on different categories. So that it is easier for you to choose the best criminal justice research topics.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1.what are some criminal justice research topics.

Research Topics in Criminal Justice System: 1. Capital Punishment. 2. Community Corrections. 3. Crime Prevention. 4. Criminal Courts. 5. Criminal Justice Ethics. 6. Criminal Law. 7. Criminal Specialisation. 8. Drug Courts.

Q2. How do I choose a research topic?

Two main ways to find a research topic: through your academic interests or by self-initiation. You can find a topic through your academic focus, talk to your professors and classmates about what they’re working on, and they can point you in the right direction and introduce you to the process of conducting research. The other option is to start with The idea that interests you.

Related Posts

Step by Step Guide on The Best Way to Finance Car

The Best Way on How to Get Fund For Business to Grow it Efficiently

• Privacy Policy

Buy Me a Coffee

Home » 500+ Criminal Justice Research Topics

500+ Criminal Justice Research Topics

Criminal justice is a complex and critical field that encompasses various aspects of crime prevention, law enforcement, legal proceedings, and punishment. Research plays a crucial role in understanding and addressing the challenges and opportunities in this field. From studying the causes and consequences of crime to exploring the effectiveness of policies and interventions, there is a wide range of fascinating and important criminal justice research topics to explore. Whether you are a student, a scholar, a practitioner, or a curious citizen, delving into the world of criminal justice research can deepen your knowledge, sharpen your critical thinking skills, and contribute to creating a safer and fairer society. In this post, we will introduce some of the most compelling and relevant criminal justice research topics that you may find intriguing and informative.

Criminal Justice Research Topics

Criminal Justice Research Topics are as follows:

• The effectiveness of community policing in reducing crime rates
• The impact of body-worn cameras on police accountability and public trust
• The causes and consequences of police use of excessive force
• The role of race and ethnicity in police-citizen interactions and perceptions
• The effectiveness of diversion programs in reducing recidivism among juvenile offenders
• The impact of mandatory minimum sentencing on crime rates and prison populations
• The challenges and opportunities of restorative justice as an alternative to punitive justice
• The role of mental health and substance abuse treatment in reducing criminal behavior
• The ethics and implications of using predictive policing algorithms
• The impact of private prisons on the criminal justice system and society
• The effectiveness of victim-offender mediation in reducing the harm of crime
• The prevalence and causes of wrongful convictions and the implications for justice
• The role of media in shaping public perceptions of crime and justice
• The effectiveness and fairness of the death penalty as a form of punishment
• The role of international law in addressing transnational crimes such as terrorism and human trafficking
• The impact of the War on Drugs on drug use, drug-related crime, and public health
• The effectiveness of gun control laws in reducing gun violence and crime rates
• The role of technology in enhancing or challenging the criminal justice system, such as DNA analysis or facial recognition software
• The prevalence and causes of domestic violence and the effectiveness of intervention programs
• The impact of sentencing disparities based on race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status
• The role of plea bargaining in the criminal justice system and the implications for justice
• The effectiveness of sex offender registries and notification laws in reducing sex crimes
• The impact of pretrial detention on defendants’ rights and outcomes
• The role of community-based corrections in reducing recidivism and promoting reentry
• The ethics and implications of using unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) for surveillance and law enforcement
• The effectiveness and implications of using risk assessment tools in pretrial decision-making
• The prevalence and impact of hate crimes and the challenges of prosecuting them
• The role of eyewitness testimony in criminal trials and the reliability of memory
• The effectiveness of drug courts in reducing drug-related crime and improving outcomes for offenders
• The impact of race and ethnicity on the administration of the death penalty
• The role of juries in the criminal justice system and the factors that affect their decisions
• The effectiveness and ethics of using informants in criminal investigations and prosecutions
• The prevalence and impact of cybercrime and the challenges of investigating and prosecuting it
• The effectiveness of juvenile justice reforms in promoting rehabilitation and reducing recidivism
• The impact of community-based policing on police-citizen relations and trust
• The role of social media in shaping perceptions of crime and justice
• The effectiveness of prison education and vocational training programs in promoting rehabilitation and reducing recidivism
• The prevalence and impact of human rights abuses in the criminal justice system, such as torture or discrimination
• The effectiveness of gang prevention and intervention programs in reducing gang-related crime
• The role of implicit bias in the criminal justice system and its impact on outcomes
• The impact of solitary confinement on mental health, behavior, and reentry outcomes
• The impact of police body cameras on public trust and police accountability.
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for juvenile offenders.
• The impact of community policing on crime reduction
• The use of predictive policing in law enforcement
• The impact of decriminalizing marijuana on crime rates
• The role of mental health professionals in the criminal justice system
• The effectiveness of de-escalation training for police officers
• The impact of technology on police surveillance practices
• The relationship between gender and sentencing disparities in the criminal justice system
• The relationship between poverty and crime
• The effectiveness of restorative justice programs in reducing recidivism
• The impact of the War on Drugs on mass incarceration
• The use of cognitive-behavioral therapy in offender rehabilitation
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for people with substance use disorders
• The role of implicit bias in jury selection
• The impact of police officer stress on use of force incidents
• The use of big data in criminal investigations and decision-making
• The effectiveness of restorative justice practices in school disciplinary policies
• The relationship between mental illness and homelessness in the criminal justice system
• The impact of mandatory minimum sentences on juvenile offenders
• The role of drug courts in the criminal justice system
• The effectiveness of offender reentry programs for people with disabilities
• The impact of restorative justice programs on victims of crime
• The use of therapeutic jurisprudence in the criminal justice system
• The relationship between race and ethnicity and the use of force by private security personnel
• The effectiveness of educational programs in correctional facilities
• The impact of eyewitness identification procedures on wrongful convictions
• The role of community-based policing in reducing crime rates
• The use of predictive analytics in bail decisions
• The effectiveness of correctional education programs on recidivism
• The impact of immigration enforcement policies on immigrant communities’ trust in law enforcement
• The relationship between mental health and juvenile detention
• The use of biometrics in criminal investigations and identification
• The effectiveness of mental health courts in reducing recidivism among people with co-occurring disorders
• The impact of gender and sexuality on hate crime victimization and reporting
• The role of cultural competence in police training
• The use of risk assessment tools in pretrial detention decisions
• The effectiveness of community supervision programs for people with substance use disorders
• The impact of social and economic policies on criminal justice outcomes
• The relationship between race and ethnicity and criminal case outcomes
• The use of therapeutic communities in correctional facilities
• The effectiveness of specialized courts for domestic violence cases
• The impact of gun violence on public safety and crime rates
• The role of eyewitness memory and recall in criminal investigations and trials
• The use of DNA evidence in criminal investigations and exoneration
• The effectiveness of probation and parole programs for people with disabilities
• The impact of victim impact statements on sentencing decisions
• The relationship between criminal justice policies and racial and ethnic disparities in incarceration rates
• The use of unmanned aerial vehicles in law enforcement
• The effectiveness of community-based restorative justice programs for juvenile offenders
• The impact of public defender workload on criminal case outcomes
• The role of community activism and advocacy in criminal justice reform
• The use of risk assessment tools in school disciplinary policies
• The effectiveness of family-focused interventions in reducing juvenile recidivism
• The impact of police officer race and ethnicity on use of force incidents
• The relationship between race and ethnicity and prosecutorial decision-making
• The use of virtual reality simulations in police training
• The effectiveness of mental health diversion programs for people with traumatic brain injuries
• The impact of juvenile life without parole sentences on individuals and society.
• The use of drones in criminal investigations
• The effectiveness of community-based alternatives to incarceration for nonviolent offenders
• The impact of wrongful convictions on the criminal justice system
• The role of implicit bias in criminal justice decision-making
• The use of risk assessment tools in child welfare investigations
• The effectiveness of offender reentry programs in reducing recidivism
• The impact of hate crimes on marginalized communities
• The relationship between mental health and the use of force by police officers
• The use of body language analysis in criminal interrogations
• The effectiveness of community policing strategies in building trust between police and communities
• The impact of race on police use of force and police brutality
• The role of prosecutorial discretion in the criminal justice system
• The use of algorithms in pretrial detention decisions
• The effectiveness of victim-centered approaches to sexual assault investigations
• The impact of domestic violence on child custody decisions
• The relationship between social media and cybercrime
• The use of facial recognition technology in law enforcement
• The effectiveness of police officer training programs on cultural sensitivity and bias reduction
• The impact of the school-to-prison pipeline on youth
• The role of mental health courts in diversion programs
• The use of virtual reality technology in criminal justice education and training
• The effectiveness of crisis intervention teams in responding to mental health crises
• The impact of immigration policies on crime reporting and victimization rates in immigrant communities
• The relationship between police department size and use of force incidents
• The use of predictive analytics in parole and probation supervision
• The effectiveness of juvenile justice system diversion programs for LGBTQ+ youth
• The impact of bail reform on pretrial detention rates and recidivism
• The role of trauma-informed care in the criminal justice system
• The use of artificial intelligence in forensic investigations
• The effectiveness of prison entrepreneurship programs in reducing recidivism
• The impact of COVID-19 on the criminal justice system
• The relationship between mental health and incarceration rates
• The use of social network analysis in criminal investigations
• The effectiveness of drug testing and monitoring programs for probationers and parolees
• The impact of mandatory minimum sentences on drug offenses
• The role of the media in shaping public perceptions of crime and the criminal justice system
• The use of body-worn cameras in courtroom proceedings
• The effectiveness of mental health diversion programs for veterans involved in the criminal justice system
• The impact of race and ethnicity on the plea bargaining process
• The relationship between police department diversity and community trust
• The use of crime mapping in law enforcement strategies
• The effectiveness of animal therapy programs in correctional facilities
• The impact of the death penalty on families of victims and offenders
• The role of prosecutorial misconduct in wrongful convictions.
• Racial disparities in the use of capital punishment
• The effectiveness of electronic monitoring as an alternative to incarceration
• The role of restorative justice in reducing recidivism
• The relationship between mental illness and criminal behavior
• The effectiveness of drug courts in reducing drug-related offenses
• The impact of body-worn cameras on police behavior and citizen complaints
• The use of risk assessment tools in sentencing and release decisions
• The effectiveness of boot camp programs for juvenile offenders
• The use of eyewitness testimony in criminal trials
• The impact of victim-offender mediation on the criminal justice system
• The relationship between education level and criminal behavior
• The effectiveness of parole and probation in reducing recidivism
• The use of artificial intelligence in criminal justice decision-making
• The role of public defenders in the criminal justice system
• The impact of mandatory minimum sentences on the prison population
• The effectiveness of therapeutic courts for individuals with substance abuse disorders
• The impact of social media on the reporting of crimes and public perception of crime
• The effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy in reducing recidivism
• The impact of mental health courts on the criminal justice system
• The role of community service in reducing recidivism
• The relationship between domestic violence and gun ownership
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for individuals with mental illnesses
• The impact of sentencing guidelines on judicial discretion
• The use of police body language in detecting deception during interviews
• The relationship between incarceration and employment opportunities post-release
• The effectiveness of community-based supervision programs for released offenders
• The impact of the war on drugs on the criminal justice system
• The role of race and ethnicity in plea bargaining decisions
• The use of risk assessment tools in juvenile justice
• The effectiveness of animal-assisted therapy in correctional facilities
• The impact of restorative justice on the victims of crime
• The relationship between gun laws and gun violence rates
• The effectiveness of pretrial diversion programs for individuals with mental illnesses
• The role of reentry programs in reducing recidivism
• The impact of mandatory arrest policies in domestic violence cases
• The use of polygraph tests in criminal investigations
• The relationship between gang membership and criminal behavior
• The effectiveness of drug treatment courts in reducing recidivism
• The impact of solitary confinement on mental health and behavior
• The role of gun buyback programs in reducing gun violence
• The relationship between substance abuse and child abuse
• The effectiveness of victim impact panels in reducing drunk driving
• The impact of juvenile detention on mental health and behavior
• The use of forensic science in criminal investigations
• The relationship between race and wrongful convictions
• The effectiveness of prison education programs in reducing recidivism
• The impact of police militarization on community trust and safety
• The relationship between race, ethnicity, and police use of force.
• The impact of mandatory minimum sentencing laws on incarceration rates.
• The effectiveness of community policing in reducing crime rates.
• The relationship between mental illness and criminal behavior.
• The role of gender in criminal justice sentencing and outcomes.
• The impact of the war on drugs on incarceration rates and drug use.
• The effectiveness of restorative justice programs in reducing recidivism.
• The impact of solitary confinement on mental health and rehabilitation.
• The relationship between poverty and crime rates.
• The role of technology in modern policing and criminal justice.
• The effectiveness of drug courts in reducing drug-related crime.
• The relationship between immigration and crime rates.
• The impact of mandatory arrest policies in cases of domestic violence.
• The effectiveness of victim-offender mediation in reducing recidivism.
• The role of social media in modern crime and policing.
• The impact of police militarization on community trust and safety.
• The effectiveness of rehabilitation programs for incarcerated individuals.
• The relationship between gun ownership and violent crime.
• The impact of wrongful convictions on individuals and the criminal justice system.
• The role of race and ethnicity in jury selection and decision-making.
• The effectiveness of mental health courts in reducing recidivism.
• The relationship between education and crime rates.
• The impact of body-worn cameras on police officer behavior and decision-making.
• The effectiveness of drug treatment programs in reducing recidivism.
• The relationship between domestic violence and gun ownership.
• The impact of the death penalty on deterrence and sentencing outcomes.
• The role of implicit bias in policing and criminal justice decision-making.
• The effectiveness of community-based reentry programs for formerly incarcerated individuals.
• The relationship between crime rates and social inequality.
• The impact of predictive policing on crime rates and community trust.
• The effectiveness of probation and parole programs in reducing recidivism.
• The relationship between mental health and policing.
• The impact of police unions on police accountability and reform efforts.
• The role of the media in shaping public perceptions of crime and justice.
• The effectiveness of pretrial diversion programs in reducing incarceration rates.
• The relationship between police use of force and police training.
• The impact of mandatory minimum drug sentences on racial disparities in the criminal justice system.
• The effectiveness of juvenile detention alternatives in reducing recidivism.
• The relationship between mass incarceration and economic inequality.
• The impact of police body language on civilian compliance.
• The role of community organizations in crime prevention and intervention.
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for people with disabilities.
• The relationship between mental health and criminal justice reform.
• The impact of immigration policies on community safety and trust.
• The role of prosecutorial discretion in the criminal justice system.
• The effectiveness of job training programs for formerly incarcerated individuals.
• The relationship between race and drug policy.
• The impact of pretrial detention on case outcomes and incarceration rates.
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for offenders with mental health issues
• The prevalence and impact of police corruption and the challenges of rooting it out
• The role of victim impact statements in the criminal justice system and their impact on sentencing
• The impact of social inequality on crime rates and the criminal justice system
• The role of political ideology in shaping criminal justice policy and practice
• The effectiveness of rehabilitation and reentry programs for adult offenders
• The prevalence and impact of sexual harassment and assault within the criminal justice system
• The role of the Fourth Amendment in regulating police searches and seizures
• The effectiveness of restorative justice practices in addressing campus sexual assault
• The impact of mass incarceration on families and communities
• The ethics and implications of using artificial intelligence in criminal justice decision-making
• The role of bail reform in promoting justice and reducing pretrial detention
• The prevalence and impact of police misconduct and accountability mechanisms
• The effectiveness of drug policy reform in reducing drug-related harm and promoting public health
• The impact of globalization on transnational crimes and the challenges of international cooperation
• The role of prosecutorial discretion in shaping criminal justice outcomes
• The prevalence and impact of white-collar crime and the challenges of prosecution
• The role of public defenders in ensuring access to justice for indigent defendants
• The effectiveness of mental health courts in diverting mentally ill offenders from the criminal justice system
• The impact of the criminal justice system on immigrant communities and the challenges of immigrant detention and deportation
• The role of forgiveness in restorative justice and its implications for healing and reconciliation
• The effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution in reducing court congestion and promoting justice
• The prevalence and impact of hate speech and the challenges of regulating it
• The role of public opinion in shaping criminal justice policy and practice
• The effectiveness of community supervision in reducing recidivism and promoting reentry
• The impact of the criminalization of homelessness on vulnerable populations
• The role of community activism and advocacy in promoting criminal justice reform
• The effectiveness of therapeutic jurisprudence in promoting rehabilitation and well-being
• The prevalence and impact of police militarization and its implications for public safety and civil liberties
• The role of eyewitness identification procedures in criminal investigations and the reliability of identification evidence
• The effectiveness of harm reduction strategies in reducing drug-related harm and promoting public health
• The impact of the criminal justice system on Indigenous communities and the challenges of decolonizing justice
• The role of hate crime legislation in promoting justice and reducing hate-motivated violence
• The effectiveness of police training programs in reducing racial and ethnic bias and promoting cultural competence
• The prevalence and impact of gun violence and the challenges of gun control policy
• The role of the Eighth Amendment in regulating cruel and unusual punishment
• The effectiveness of problem-solving courts in addressing complex social issues and promoting justice
• The impact of the criminal justice system on LGBTQ+ communities and the challenges of achieving equality and inclusivity
• The role of victim services in promoting healing and well-being for crime victims
• The effectiveness of drug testing and monitoring programs in promoting rehabilitation and reducing recidivism
• The prevalence and impact of prison gangs and the challenges of managing them
• The role of implicit bias in eyewitness identification and the implications for justice
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for offenders with substance abuse issues
• The impact of social media on crime reporting and law enforcement
• The role of mental health diversion programs in reducing mass incarceration and promoting treatment
• The prevalence and impact of wrongful convictions of innocent people and the challenges of exoneration
• The relationship between immigration and crime rates
• The impact of drug courts on drug-related offenses and recidivism rates
• The use of restorative justice practices in the criminal justice system
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for people released from prison
• The use of polygraph tests in criminal investigations and court proceedings
• The impact of bail amounts on pretrial detention and case outcomes
• The relationship between gun ownership and crime rates
• The effectiveness of mental health screening and assessment for individuals involved in the criminal justice system
• The use of virtual courtrooms in criminal proceedings
• The impact of juvenile detention on mental health and future criminal behavior
• The relationship between poverty and crime rates
• The use of eyewitness identification procedures in criminal investigations and court proceedings
• The effectiveness of community service programs as a sentencing alternative
• The role of racial profiling in law enforcement practices
• The use of risk assessment tools in sentencing and parole decisions
• The impact of mandatory reporting laws on child abuse and neglect cases
• The relationship between parental incarceration and children’s wellbeing
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for drug-related offenses
• The use of cognitive-behavioral therapy in offender rehabilitation programs
• The impact of solitary confinement on mental health and recidivism rates
• The relationship between social capital and crime rates
• The use of DNA evidence in criminal investigations and court proceedings
• The effectiveness of crisis response teams in reducing police use of force incidents
• The role of race and ethnicity in jury selection and decision-making
• The impact of court fines and fees on individuals involved in the criminal justice system
• The relationship between education and crime rates
• The use of risk assessment tools in domestic violence cases
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for individuals with substance use disorders
• The impact of court-appointed attorneys on case outcomes and access to justice
• The role of victim impact statements in sentencing decisions
• The use of mental health courts for individuals with co-occurring disorders
• The effectiveness of court-mandated treatment programs for drug offenders
• The impact of gender on the sentencing and treatment of offenders
• The relationship between drug policy and crime rates
• The use of forensic psychology in criminal investigations and court proceedings
• The effectiveness of cognitive interviewing techniques in witness testimony
• The impact of the media on public perceptions of the criminal justice system
• The relationship between neighborhood characteristics and crime rates
• The use of body-worn cameras in police-community interactions
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for individuals with intellectual disabilities
• The impact of mandatory minimum sentences on sentencing disparities
• The role of mental health providers in prisons and jails
• The use of civil asset forfeiture in law enforcement practices
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for individuals with mental illness involved in the criminal justice system
• The impact of police militarization on community trust and police accountability
• The relationship between unemployment and crime rates
• The use of artificial intelligence in identifying and preventing human trafficking
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for individuals with traumatic brain injuries
• The impact of community-based alternatives to policing on public safety and crime rates.
• The impact of the militarization of police on community relations
• The effectiveness of restorative justice practices in reducing recidivism
• The relationship between socioeconomic status and juvenile delinquency
• The impact of police department culture on officer behavior
• The role of community courts in addressing low-level offenses
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for people who were formerly incarcerated
• The impact of body-worn cameras on police officer behavior and community perceptions
• The relationship between mental illness and police use of force
• The use of neuroscience in criminal sentencing
• The effectiveness of gun control policies in reducing gun violence
• The role of alternative dispute resolution in the criminal justice system
• The use of biometrics in criminal investigations
• The effectiveness of gang prevention and intervention programs
• The impact of domestic violence on employment and economic stability
• The use of artificial intelligence in criminal investigations and sentencing
• The role of implicit bias in eyewitness identification
• The use of drug courts in addressing drug addiction and drug-related crimes
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for juvenile offenders
• The impact of social media on crime and victimization
• The relationship between mental health and incarceration of women
• The use of surveillance technologies in correctional facilities
• The effectiveness of victim-offender mediation programs
• The impact of prosecutorial discretion on plea bargaining outcomes
• The role of mental health assessments in competency to stand trial determinations
• The use of biographical information in criminal investigations
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for people with mental illness
• The impact of police body language on community perceptions
• The relationship between criminal justice policies and racial disparities in healthcare
• The use of geospatial analysis in predicting crime patterns
• The effectiveness of community service programs in reducing recidivism
• The impact of court fines and fees on people with low incomes
• The role of neuroscience in detecting deception
• The use of technology in victim advocacy and support services
• The effectiveness of juvenile justice diversion programs for LGBTQ+ youth
• The impact of parental incarceration on children and families
• The relationship between race and juvenile justice system involvement
• The use of facial recognition technology in correctional facilities
• The effectiveness of community-based mental health services in reducing incarceration rates
• The impact of prison labor on employment opportunities for formerly incarcerated people
• The role of community-based restorative justice in addressing hate crimes
• The use of predictive analytics in child welfare investigations
• The effectiveness of alternative sentencing programs for drug-related offenses
• The impact of immigration enforcement policies on crime reporting in immigrant communities
• The relationship between implicit bias and jury decision-making
• The use of technology in improving language access in the criminal justice system.
• The impact of police body language on citizen perceptions and trust
• The effectiveness of police academy training on officer decision-making in high-pressure situations
• The role of technology in the spread of human trafficking
• The relationship between mental health and probation and parole revocation rates
• The use of community courts in addressing quality of life offenses
• The effectiveness of prisoner reentry programs on family reunification and support systems
• The impact of public defender caseloads on the quality of legal representation
• The role of implicit bias in jury selection and decision-making
• The use of diversion programs for juveniles involved in prostitution
• The effectiveness of community supervision programs for offenders with serious mental illness
• The impact of immigration enforcement policies on the criminal justice system
• The relationship between recidivism rates and prison education and vocational programs
• The use of body-worn cameras in prison settings
• The effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution in reducing court congestion
• The impact of prison labor on reentry and recidivism rates
• The role of risk assessment tools in parole and probation decision-making
• The effectiveness of drug courts in addressing substance abuse and recidivism
• The impact of solitary confinement on mental health and behavior in prison
• The relationship between domestic violence and firearm possession
• The use of mental health diversion programs for veterans involved in the criminal justice system
• The effectiveness of juvenile drug court programs on reducing recidivism
• The impact of private prisons on inmate rehabilitation and public safety
• The role of implicit bias in pretrial detention decisions
• The use of GPS monitoring in pretrial release and probation supervision
• The effectiveness of offender education and job training programs in reducing recidivism
• The impact of collateral consequences on reentry and recidivism rates
• The use of crisis intervention teams in responding to mental health emergencies
• The effectiveness of community-based alternatives to detention for juveniles
• The role of public opinion in shaping criminal justice policy
• The effectiveness of police body-worn cameras in reducing police misconduct and excessive use of force
• The impact of incarceration on family dynamics and relationships
• The relationship between access to legal representation and case outcomes
• The use of community supervision and support programs for individuals with substance use disorders
• The impact of pretrial detention on case outcomes and recidivism rates
• The role of prosecutorial discretion in plea bargaining and sentencing
• The use of facial recognition technology in criminal investigations and surveillance
• The effectiveness of problem-solving courts in addressing specialized criminal cases
• The impact of prison privatization on inmate rights and access to services
• The relationship between race, gender, and criminal justice outcomes
• The use of mental health courts in diversion programs
• The effectiveness of community policing strategies in building trust and reducing crime rates
• The impact of police militarization on community perceptions and police-citizen interactions
• The role of forensic evidence in criminal investigations and court proceedings
• The use of artificial intelligence in predicting criminal behavior and recidivism.
• The use of restorative justice in the criminal justice system
• The impact of police militarization on community policing efforts
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for individuals with substance use disorders
• The relationship between economic inequality and crime rates
• The use of artificial intelligence in pretrial risk assessment
• The impact of mandatory minimum sentences on non-violent drug offenses
• The impact of the War on Drugs on communities of color
• The relationship between mental health and probation violations
• The effectiveness of drug courts in reducing recidivism rates
• The role of eyewitness testimony in wrongful convictions
• The use of facial recognition technology in criminal investigations and prosecutions
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for juvenile offenders
• The impact of probation and parole supervision on recidivism rates
• The relationship between police use of force and mental health disorders
• The use of predictive analytics in criminal sentencing
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for individuals with mental illness
• The impact of bail systems on low-income individuals and communities
• The role of implicit bias in sentencing decisions
• The use of social media in criminal investigations
• The impact of mandatory sentencing on judicial discretion
• The relationship between drug addiction and property crime
• The use of predictive analytics in risk assessment for pretrial release
• The effectiveness of substance abuse treatment programs in correctional facilities
• The impact of police body-worn cameras on police-citizen interactions
• The role of forensic evidence in wrongful convictions
• The use of drones in border patrol and immigration enforcement
• The effectiveness of community supervision programs for individuals with mental illness
• The impact of mandatory sentencing on the prison population and corrections costs
• The relationship between gang activity and violent crime
• The use of artificial intelligence in criminal investigations and evidence collection
• The effectiveness of juvenile diversion programs for first-time offenders
• The impact of prosecutorial misconduct on wrongful convictions
• The role of implicit bias in police use of force incidents
• The use of risk assessment tools in pretrial detention decisions for juvenile defendants
• The effectiveness of prison education programs in reducing recidivism rates
• The impact of racial profiling on policing practices and community trust
• The relationship between homelessness and criminal behavior
• The use of predictive analytics in identifying and preventing cybercrime
• The effectiveness of mental health treatment programs for incarcerated individuals
• The impact of the school-to-prison pipeline on students of color
• The role of community-based programs in reducing crime rates and recidivism
• The use of neuroscience in criminal investigations and sentencing decisions
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for individuals with co-occurring disorders
• The impact of solitary confinement on mental health and recidivism rates.
• The effectiveness of diversion programs for offenders with substance use disorders
• The impact of judicial discretion on sentencing outcomes
• The relationship between access to legal representation and sentencing disparities
• The use of body-worn cameras in reducing police misconduct and brutality
• The impact of bail practices on pretrial detention and racial disparities
• The relationship between police unions and police accountability
• The effectiveness of community supervision in reducing recidivism
• The impact of solitary confinement on mental health outcomes for inmates
• The relationship between criminal justice policies and racial wealth inequality
• The use of risk assessment tools in sentencing decisions
• The effectiveness of mandatory minimum sentences in reducing crime rates
• The impact of victim impact statements on sentencing outcomes
• The relationship between criminal justice policies and environmental justice
• The use of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) in law enforcement
• The effectiveness of juvenile justice diversion programs for at-risk youth
• The impact of police militarization on community relations
• The relationship between immigration enforcement and public safety
• The use of artificial intelligence in predicting recidivism risk
• The effectiveness of police training on de-escalation tactics
• The relationship between the criminal justice system and income inequality
• The use of geographic profiling in criminal investigations
• The effectiveness of mental health courts in reducing incarceration rates
• The impact of mandatory arrest policies on domestic violence victims
• The relationship between criminal justice policies and public health outcomes
• The use of body-worn cameras in reducing false accusations against police officers
• The effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy in reducing domestic violence recidivism
• The impact of race and ethnicity on police use of force during traffic stops
• The use of predictive analytics in parole and probation revocation decisions
• The effectiveness of offender treatment programs for intimate partner violence offenders
• The impact of prison education programs on post-release employment and recidivism
• The relationship between prison labor and modern-day slavery
• The use of predictive modeling to prevent child abuse and neglect
• The effectiveness of community courts in reducing recidivism rates
• The impact of community-based organizations on crime prevention
• The relationship between mental health and substance use disorders in the criminal justice system
• The use of mobile forensic technology in criminal investigations
• The effectiveness of gender-responsive programming in reducing female recidivism rates
• The impact of anti-immigrant sentiment on policing in immigrant communities
• The relationship between police legitimacy and public trust
• The use of data analytics in law enforcement resource allocation
• The effectiveness of reentry programs for people with disabilities
• The impact of police misconduct on wrongful convictions
• The relationship between restorative justice and school discipline
• The use of location tracking technology in the criminal justice system
• The effectiveness of anti-bias training for law enforcement officers
• The impact of drug decriminalization on public safety and health.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

200+ Funny Research Topics

500+ Sports Research Topics

300+ American History Research Paper Topics

500+ Cyber Security Research Topics

500+ Environmental Research Topics

500+ Economics Research Topics

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 04 September 2018

Young and unafraid: queer criminology’s unbounded potential

• Vanessa R. Panfil   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-3005-4726 1  

Palgrave Communications volume  4 , Article number:  110 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

11k Accesses

9 Citations

2 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Criminology
• Social policy

Queer criminology, a fairly young subfield, deals with matters of import for sexual and gender minorities, particularly LGBTQ+ populations. Areas of interest include reducing invisibility and inequity, though these pursuits can sometimes be accompanied with potential pitfalls or unintended consequences. This article provides an overview of the goals and considerations of queer criminology, while focusing on how to cultivate queer criminology’s unbounded potential to help address pressing social problems. Several global issues of immediate concern for LGBTQ+ people are identified, such as criminalization and devaluation of their lives, which has resulted in their detainment and torture, persecution when they organize for their rights, overrepresentation in criminal justice settings, and even fatal violence. Included alongside these issues are strategies to produce meaningful work during what seems to be a time of imminent crisis. The author provides strong encouragement to fiercely pursue projects that can improve our understanding, and, ultimately, the lives of LGBTQ+ people.

Shared themes in queer criminology

Queer criminology focuses primarily on issues of import for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, and asexual (LGBTQ+) people, such as their experiences with crime, victimization, the criminal and juvenile justice systems, and as justice system actors. Thus, broader concepts that queer criminologists investigate include discrimination, harassment, safety, and fairness. Some would also argue for a more expansive version of “queer” that encompasses not just self-identified LGBTQ+ people, but includes anyone who is outside of society’s boundaries pertaining to sex, gender, or sexuality. This is a related reason for the plus sign (+) in the LGBTQ+ acronym, as “LGBTQ” and similar acronyms cannot meaningfully capture everyone. A major thread in queer criminological scholarship is reducing invisibility of LGBTQ+ people in these contexts, which could include: as victims, in the form of improved records-keeping and integration of news coverage; as individuals navigating risk or seeking to avoid victimization or persecution; their overrepresentation and negative experiences in the juvenile and criminal justice systems; as criminal justice professionals who may break norms of paramilitary, hypermasculine organizations; and even as offenders. Many queer criminologists directly advocate for queer people’s equity and dignity, and for resources to be allocated to improve their outcomes.

Queer criminology’s growth has occurred primarily since 2000, with exponential growth happening from 2014 onward. Several full-length edited volumes (Peterson and Panfil, 2014 ; Dwyer et al., 2016 ), special issues of journals (Ball et al., 2014 ), and monographs (Ball, 2016b ; Buist and Lenning, 2016 ) address queer criminology and its relevant topics. A complete bibliography of queer criminological work is beyond the scope of this piece, but a brief review of some recent queer criminological topics will be illustrative of the range of approaches under this umbrella.

Regarding disciplinary concerns, queer criminologists have traced the history of criminology and its heteronormative origins (Woods, 2014 ), argued for integrating queer theory into social science discourses (Ball, 2016b ), and showed the lack of engagement with LGBTQ+ topics in criminology and criminal justice curricula (Cannon and Dirks-Linhorst, 2007 ). Concerning victimization, topics have included hate crimes in a global context (Stotzer, 2014 ), how transgender women navigate their safety after experiencing hate violence (Perry and Dyck, 2014 ), and experiences with intrafamilial hate violence among gay men and lesbians (Asquith and Fox, 2016 ), but has also critiqued hate crime laws (Meyer, 2014 ). Research on the criminal and juvenile justice system experiences of LGBTQ+ people has explored how courts and corrections not only fail them, but cause harm (Mogul et al., 2011 ), the programmatic needs and requests of sexual minority youth (Belknap et al., 2014 ), and how transgender women housed in men’s prisons build community and experience prison life (Sexton and Jenness, 2016 ). Policing research is also well-represented, such as tracing the history of policing queer people and asking whether progressive policies can emerge (Dwyer and Tomsen, 2016 ), assessing the effectiveness of police liaison programs meant to serve LGBTQ+ communities (Dwyer et al., 2017 ), and describing how gay and lesbian police officers navigate their occupation (Colvin, 2012 ). Queer criminology has even explored contexts of offending, such as youth weapons-carrying (Button and Worthen, 2017 ), how gay gang members construct identity through crime and gang membership (Panfil, 2017 ), and the dynamics of same-sex intimate partner violence (Messinger, 2017 ).

Unbounded potential

Among queer criminological circles, there has been some debate about its intellectual heritage, or what branch of criminology it falls under. For example, some might argue queer criminology is squarely within critical criminology, which “includes a variety of progressive, humanistic, and radical perspectives” (Kauzlarich, 2018 , p. 14) that challenge dominant understandings of the contours of crime and criminal justice. Critical perspectives that can be queered also include cultural criminology, with its interest in subcultures, situated meanings and identities, resistance, space/place, and risk and embodiment (Hayward and Young, 2004 ), not to mention a very early call for a “queered criminology” originating in an edited volume setting forth agendas for cultural criminology (Ferrell and Sanders, 1995 ). In contrast, others might suggest that it falls within the purview of feminist criminology, since gender and sexuality have long been foci of this tradition (see, e.g., Daly, 1994 ), and it has arguably included LGBTQ+ people more consistently than any other criminological subfield. There are practical implications for this debate about where queer criminology “lives” within the context of a larger disciplinary structure. For example, scholars may use indicators to help guide them as to where to send manuscripts, such as to Feminist Criminology versus Critical Criminology , or for which divisions of professional organizations they should perform service. All of these streams of criminology have legitimate claims to helping develop queer criminological work.

Personally, I am not interested in figuring out one exclusive “home” for queer criminology, especially as different projects have contributions to make within critical, cultural, or feminist criminology—or elsewhere! In fact, I have argued before that queer criminology, or at least attention to the experiences of LGBTQ+ populations, is of central importance to the larger discipline (Panfil and Miller, 2014 ), and queer criminologists should strive to make at least some of their work accessible to and conversant with mainstream, even orthodox, criminology. Recent examples of this include queer criminologists’ integrations of recognizable criminological concepts such as the “criminal career” (e.g., Asquith et al., 2017 ) or testing well-known criminological theories including general strain theory (e.g., Button and Worthen, 2017 ). And, there are ways forward that would not abandon a critical queer criminology at the discipline’s margins, but would still be active in dialoguing with mainstream criminology in the hopes of “pointing out how its well-entrenched heteronormative and positivistic bad habits are holding it back,” such that we queer criminologists can help make criminology “a better discipline” (Dalton, 2016 , p. 30; original emphasis).

Furthermore, work that makes meaningful contributions to our knowledge about the safety and well-being of LGBTQ+ people may not appear in criminological outlets. One example is research on unnecessary surgical modification of intersex infants and children: although these surgeries are advised against by patient support groups and various human rights organizations and have been shown to cause both mental and physical harm, they continue to be performed daily in the U.S. (Davis and Murphy, 2013 ). Part of queer criminology’s unbounded potential is its ability to answer questions of import in today’s diverse world. Thus, in a more general sense, in order to do queer criminological work, I argue that scholars should not feel constrained by deep-seated disciplinary norms or politics that have systematically excluded LGBTQ+ people from humanistic and nuanced exploration.

To assume that queer criminology only has contributions to make to academic contexts would be selling it wildly short. Queer criminological work should dialogue not just with the broader field or related interdisciplinary fields, but with the public and community institutions. Many LGBTQ+ people who are not academics, but who still experience what it is like to live as a queer person daily, are very interested in trends of violence against queer people or political moves to restrict their rights, and the implications this has on health and well-being. We need to better utilize public criminology to get information out to the communities that could benefit from it, through social media, community forums, press releases, standard websites, and potentially even open access academic journals.

Related to this point of encouraging public criminology and collaboration with community organizations, work on many queer criminological topics exists largely within the public realm already. In fact, much of what we know on topics such as state mistreatment of LGBTQ+ people, fatal violence against transgender women, and experiences of queer people in the criminal and juvenile justice systems comes from the grey literature—reports from organizations that conduct research and release it on their own or outside of academic or commercial publishers. Thus, much information about LGBTQ+ populations’ experiences with crime and justice, especially the experiences of LGBTQ+ people of color, comes not from academics, but from organizations or associations doing work on the ground. These include Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network), National Center for Lesbian Rights, Human Rights Campaign, Trans People of Color Coalition, the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, Center for American Progress, the Movement Advancement Project, and Black and Pink.

The unbounded potential of queer criminology also exists at the intersection of activism and scholarship. This could be conceived of outside the academy, such as scholars engaging in community organizing or volunteerism. However, scholars can also participate in activism through traditional academic acts such as research, teaching, and service—queer criminology as activism (Ball, 2016a ). Indeed, a diverse group of queer criminologists themselves note the importance of framing certain disciplinary acts as advocacy, and allowing our scholarship to inform our advocacy and vice versa (Dwyer and Panfil, 2017 ).

Of immediate concern

LGBTQ+ people have faced many challenges globally throughout history, and several contemporary revelations are particularly disturbing and concerning. For example, global news media has reported on suspected instances of queer people being systematically rounded up, detained, tortured, “disappeared,” and/or killed en masse—in modern-day Chechnya, for instance (Rainsford, 2017 ). Similarly, it is disconcerting when leaders of republics, such as those of Iran or Chechnya, say, “In Iran, we don’t have homosexuals like in your country [the U.S.]” (Goldman, 2007 ), or that there are no gay people in Chechnya (Rainsford, 2017 ). Although these statements are likely related to issues of visibility combined with those leaders’ goals for social desirability, it also raises unsettling questions about what efforts are being taken to ensure that no gay people exist in their respective locales. Human rights organizations have uncovered state torture and ill-treatment of LGBTQ+ people in countries across the world, in both the global North and the global South (Amnesty International, 2001 ).

In addition, it is estimated that nearly 80 countries have laws criminalizing same-sex sexual contact (Itaborahy and Zhu, 2013 ). Others have laws that dictate guidelines for self-presentation (such as no “cross-dressing”) or sexual contact (such as prohibiting “sodomy”) that may not explicitly mention LGBTQ+ people, but are often used to target their daily lives. In some of these countries, many of which are located in the global South, LGBTQ+ rights activists face extreme stigma and violence. They have been doxxed (their addresses/phone numbers or other identifying information released through local media), subjected to police harassment, targeted for interpersonal violence, and/or forced to flee. Several prominent activists, such as Brian Williamson of Jamaica, Xulhaz Mannan of Bangladesh, and Eric Ohena Lembembe of Cameroon, were murdered after their pro-LGBTQ+ activities were publicized; these activists’ lives and good works have been further devalued by victim blaming, and, in the latter two cases, a lack of sincere effort to bring a perpetrator to justice (for more details on each of these individuals’ activism and their murders, see Asquith et al., 2018 ). Australian queer criminologists in particular are thus far leading the way in combining Southern criminology and queer criminology (e.g., Ball and Dwyer, 2018 ), but hopefully others will serve as allies and collaborators to scholars and advocates in the global South who are motivated to pursue this work.

A related concern that has received much attention in the United States is the incidence of fatal violence against transgender people, especially transgender women of color. Compared to all women, transgender women are estimated to be 4.3 times more likely to be murdered; furthermore, 93 percent of the known transgender homicide victims between 2013–2016 were people of color, three-quarters of whom were African American (HRC and TPOCC, 2016 ). Just over two-thirds of all victims of anti-LGBTQ+ or HIV-motivated hate violence homicides are transgender women of color (NCAVP, 2013 ). Factors that contribute to this violence include misogyny, false and damaging cultural stereotypes of transgender people as “deceptive,” and perceived support for so-called “trans panic” as a legal justification for homicide (Wodda and Panfil, 2015 ). Racist, misogynist, and transphobic cultural forces combine to create dangerous scenarios for transgender women of color, and interventions into these structural forces are vitally necessary.

Queer people, including young LGBTQ+ people, are not only overrepresented in the juvenile and criminal justice systems, but are underserved by social institutions because they are denied equal protection in education, housing, employment, and healthcare. For example, LGBTQ+ youths’ percentages in the juvenile justice system are more than twice their proportion within the general youth population (Hunt and Moodie-Mills, 2012 ). They may end up in the juvenile justice system through mechanisms such as the school-to-prison pipeline, where LGBTQ+ youth are targeted for disciplinary infractions or exclusionary discipline (such as suspension, expulsion, or school transfer) related to their sexual orientation or gender expression (Burdge et al., 2014 ). They are also overcriminalized for activities such as engaging in age-appropriate sexual exploration with same-sex peers, or for their reactions to familial discord resulting from their LGBTQ+ identities (Majd et al., 2009 ). Criminal processing system overreach manifests in many forms, but is perhaps especially egregious in the case of “walking while trans,” where transgender people are arrested for suspicion of prostitution or other “quality of life” offenses simply for existing in certain areas or moving through space (Kellaway, 2015 ). Institutions similarly fail to protect LGBTQ+ people; only 19 states in the U.S. prevent employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (Bellis, 2017 ). Transgender and gender nonconforming people are especially vulnerable to discrimination in the workplace, which perpetuates inequality and can even lead to survival crimes (Walker et al., 2018 ). Furthermore, the current U.S. federal administration has taken steps to allow healthcare workers to refuse services on religious grounds or “conscience” objections, and it seems likely this will include being able to refuse services to LGBTQ+ people (Kodjak, 2018 ). Because of the potential that LGBTQ+ people may be refused necessary healthcare services under government approval, this could soon be a state violence concern.

A caveat relevant to conducting queer criminological research is the risk of unintended consequences, such as our data being used to bolster administrative projects that further surveil, control, or criminalize LGBTQ+ people (Ball, 2014 ; see also Panfil, 2014 ). Because of the potential criminal justice system overreach mentioned prior, it is probably best to draw from the sensibilities of penal abolition as we proceed. After all, some scholars (e.g., Spade, 2013 ) have convincingly argued that we as queer scholars and community members should be hesitant to place our trust or resources in the same institutions that have historically marginalized and harmed people like us.

Meaningful work

The issues and topics that queer criminologists pursue constitute inherently meaningful work. Some projects may not seem to have an immediately obvious policy implication, such as work on identities, but any project that can shine light on LGBTQ+ people’s experiences is valuable. Topics such as those I note directly above are priority areas in my own estimation, but my forthcoming and in-progress projects do not align with all of them. Many of us have our own topical areas of concern that we have been pursuing for years, and I do not mean to imply that we should abandon other work we are doing and take up those particular challenges. In fact, many pressures today may make us feel as though we should be working on something else altogether. Scholars committed to social justice are understandably shaken by both existential and immediate threats to the world order, such as concerns about nuclear warfare and democracy being in crisis. A sense of crisis can accelerate time and make us feel that we must speed up our research process as we race to catch up, but taking more of a “slow science” approach can help us proceed more deliberately and reliably (Werth and Ballestero, 2017 ). While I do not object to research being reactionary if it evaluates a legal, political, or social change, the projects we thought were crucial at one time in the very recent past are likely still crucial and should not be shelved, and research looking broadly at deeply ingrained societal power structures is still necessary. Similar and complementary sentiments have taken root among and been fostered by many scholars. For example, the 2018 Racial Democracy, Crime, and Justice Network’s summer conference theme was “Staying on Course: Undertaking Crime and Justice Scholarship in an Anti-Science Era.” Queer criminologists (and others) should keep doing the work we feel compelled to complete. Even if the work does not seem to be about an extremely pressing social issue relevant to the policy changes of the past couple of years, any queer criminology topic does not suddenly become unimportant in light of other crises. And, more specifically, in order to understand the potential impacts of forthcoming or unfolding policy, a baseline (of sorts) would serve us well. Learning about identities, experiences, activities, meanings, challenges, hopes, fears, personal agency, social support, and other factors in the lives of LGBTQ+ people will better allow us to make sense of how things are and how they could, or should, be. I am certain that we will value possessing diverse threads of scholarship when we are again able to weave larger tapestries.

A closing thought on privilege

Although I think the tide is turning as the discipline becomes more diverse and its boundaries are pushed, doing queer criminology is sometimes still seen as a gamble or capable of producing occupational hazards. I have met many graduate students and early career scholars who have been encouraged to “de-lavender” their CV, or advised that their work on queer people or sexuality was “career suicide,” or told it was a niche topic. Clearly I do not believe these latter two to be true, and certainly would never have followed the advice provided in the former. For those of us who are able to achieve the discipline’s normative markers of success (e.g., advanced degrees, publications, grants) and feel institutionally secure, I hope we continue to use our privilege to work for us to aid others looking to contribute to queer criminology. I recognize that privilege (or the lack of it) can look very different depending on the type of academic institution, the scholar’s career stage, whether they feel they are already a token, whether conducting queer criminological work would open them up to potentially damaging professional risk, and other factors. For those of us who can exercise our discretion, autonomy, and resources to pursue these lines of inquiry and have it not be to our detriment, we should recognize the advantageous position we are in and the unbounded potential that too affords us.

It is incumbent upon us to be fiercely committed and to cultivate allies where we can. Of course, I would also encourage people who have seniority and pull and who consider themselves to be LGBTQ+ allies to also become outspoken allies of queer criminology, and mentors to the primarily untenured and early career scholars who are undertaking this work. Queer criminology as a subfield is young, so I do not blame budding scholars or newcomers for feeling wary; more specifically, I do not begrudge them caution or being strategic. However, we must be unafraid enough to push forward. There is too much on the line.

Amnesty International (2001) Crimes of hate, conspiracy of silence: torture and ill-treatment based on sexual identity. Amnesty International Publications, London

Google Scholar  

Asquith NL, Dwyer A, Simpson P (2017) A queer criminal career. Curr Issues Crim Justice 29:167–180

Asquith NL, Fox CA (2016) No place like home: Intrafamilial hate crime against gay men and lesbians. In: Dwyer A, Ball M, Crofts T (eds) Queering criminology. Palgrave Macmillan, London, p 163–182

Asquith NL, Panfil VR, Dwyer A (2018) LGBQ people and social justice. In: Roberson C (ed) Handbook of social, economic, and criminal justice. Routledge, New York, NY, p 141–156

Ball M (2014) What’s queer about queer criminology? In: Peterson D, Panfil VR (eds) Handbook of LGBT communities, crime, and justice. Springer, New York, NY, p 531–555

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Ball M (2016a) Queer criminology as activism. Crit Criminol 24:473–487

Article   Google Scholar  

Ball M (2016b) Queer theory and criminology: dangerous bedfellows? Palgrave, London

Book   Google Scholar  

Ball M, Dwyer A (2018) Queer criminology and the global south: setting queer and southern criminologies into dialogue. In: Carrington K, Hogg R, Scott J, Sozzo M (eds) Palgrave handbook of criminology and the global South. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, p 121–138

Ball M, Buist CL, Woods JB (2014) Introduction to the special issue on queer/ing criminology: new directions and frameworks. Crit Criminol 22:1–4

Belknap J, Holsinger K, Little JS (2014) Lesbian, gay, and bisexual youth incarcerated in delinquent facilities. In: Peterson D, Panfil VR (eds) Handbook of LGBT communities, crime, and justice. Springer, New York, NY, p 207–228

Bellis R (2017) Here’s everywhere in the U.S. you can still get fired for being gay or trans. https://www.fastcompany.com/40456937/heres-everywhere-in-the-u-s-you-can-still-get-fired-for-being-gay-or-trans . Accessed 30 April 2018

Buist CL, Lenning E (2016) Queer criminology. Routledge, New York, NY

Burdge H, Licona AC, Hyemingway ZT (2014) LGBTQ youth of color: discipline disparities, school push-out, and the school-to-prison pipeline. Gay-Straight Alliance Network, and Crossroads Collaborative at the University of Arizona, San Francisco, Tucson

Button DM, Worthen MGF (2017) Applying a general strain theory framework to understand school weapon carrying among LGBQ and heterosexual youth. Criminology 55:806–832

Cannon KD, Dirks-Linhorst PA (2007) How will they understand if we don’t teach them? The status of criminal justice education on gay and lesbian issues. J Crim Justice Educ 17:262–278

Colvin RA (2012) Gay and lesbian cops: diversity and effective policing. Lynne Reinner, Boulder

Dalton D (2016) Reflections on the emergence, efficacy, and value of queer criminology. In: Dwyer A, Ball M, Crofts T (eds) Queering criminology. Palgrave Macmillan, London, p 15–35

Daly K (1994) Gender, crime, and punishment. Yale University Press, New Haven

Davis G, Murphy EL (2013) Intersex bodies as states of exception: an empirical explanation for unnecessary surgical modification. Fem Form 25(2):129–152

Dwyer A, Panfil VR (2017) We need to lead the charge—Talking only to each other is not enough: the Pulse Orlando mass shooting and the futures of queer criminologies. Criminologist 42(3):1–7

Dwyer A, Tomsen S (2016) The past is the past? The impossibility of erasure of historical LGBTIQ policing. In: Dwyer A, Ball M, Crofts T (eds) Queering criminology. Palgrave Macmillan, London, p 36–53

Dwyer A, Ball M, Crofts T (eds) (2016) Queering criminology. Palgrave Macmillan, London

Dwyer A, Ball M, Bond C, Lee M, and Crofts T (2017) Exploring LGBTI police liaison services: factors influencing their use and effectiveness according to LGBTI people and LGBTI police liaison officers. Report to the Criminology Research Advisory Council. http://crg.aic.gov.au/reports/1718/31-1112-FinalReport.pdf . Accessed 16 July 2018

Ferrell J, Sanders CR (1995) Cultural criminology. Northeastern University Press, Boston

Goldman R (2007) Ahmadinejad: no gays, no oppression of women in Iran. ABC News. http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3642673. Accessed 30 April 2018

Hayward KJ, Young J (2004) Cultural criminology: some notes on the script. Theor Criminol 8:259–273

Human Rights Campaign (HRC) and Trans People of Color Coalition (TPOCC) (2016) A matter of life and death: fatal violence against transgender people in America 2016. HRC and TPOCC, Washington, D.C

Hunt J, Moodie-Mills A (2012) The unfair criminalization of gay and transgender youth: an overview of the experiences of LGBT youth in the juvenile justice system. Center for American Progress, Washington, D.C

Itaborahy LP, Zhu J (2013) State-sponsored homophobia. A world survey of laws: criminalisation, protection and recognition of same-sex love. International Lesbian Gay Bisexual Trans and Intersex Association, Brussels/Mexico City.

Kauzlarich D (2018) Critical criminology isn’t only about Marxism or the U.S. Criminologist 43(2):14

Kellaway M (2015) Arizona appeals court overturns Monica Jones’s conviction for “Walking While Trans.” The Advocate . http://www.advocate.com/politics/transgender/2015/01/27/arizona-appeals-court-overturns-monica-joness-conviction-walking-whi . Accessed 30 April 2018

Kodjak A (2018) Trump admin will protect health workers who refuse services on religious grounds. NPR.org. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/01/18/578811426/trump-will-protect-health-workers-who-reject-patients-on-religious-grounds . Accessed 30 April 2018

Majd K, Marksamer J, Reyes C (2009) Hidden injustice: lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender youth in juvenile courts. Legal Services for Children, National Juvenile Defender Center, and National Center for Lesbian Rights, San Francisco

Messinger AM (2017) LGBTQ intimate partner violence: lessons for policy, practice, and research. University of California Press, Berkeley

Meyer D (2014) Resisting hate crime discourse: queer and intersectional challenges to neoliberal hate crime laws. Crit Criminol 22:113–125

Mogul JL, Ritchie AJ, Whitlock K (2011) Queer (In)justice: the criminalization of LGBT people in the United States. Beacon Press, Boston

National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP) (2013) Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and HIV-affected hate violence in 2012. NCAVP, New York, NY

Panfil VR (2014) Better left unsaid? The role of agency in queer criminological research. Crit Criminol 22:99–111

Panfil VR (2017) The gang’s all queer: the lives of gay gang members. NYU Press, New York, NY

Panfil VR, Miller J (2014) Beyond the straight and narrow: the import of queer criminology for criminology and criminal justice. Criminologist 39(4):1–8

Perry B, Dyck DR (2014) “I don’t know where it is safe”: trans women’s experiences of violence. Crit Criminol 22:49–63

Peterson D, Panfil VR (2014) Introduction: reducing the invisibility of sexual and gender identities in criminology and criminal justice. In: Peterson D, Panfil VR (eds) Handbook of LGBT communities, crime, and justice. Springer, New York, p 3–13

Rainsford S (2017) Chechen “gay purge” victim: no one knows who will be next. BBC News. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-41645281 . Accessed 30 April 2018

Sexton L, Jenness V (2016) “We’re like community”: collective identity and collective efficacy among transgender women in prisons for men. Punishm Soc 18:544–577

Spade D (2013) Their laws will never make us safer. In: Conrad R (ed) Against equality: prisons will not protect you. Against Equality Publishing Collective, Lewiston, p 1–12

Stotzer R (2014) Bias crimes based on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI): global prevalence, impacts, and causes. In: Peterson D, Panfil VR (eds) Handbook of LGBT communities, crime, and justice. Springer, New York, NY, p 45–64

Walker A, Sexton L, Valcore J, Sumner J, Wodda A (2018) Transitioning to social justice: transgender and non-binary individuals. In: Roberson C (ed) Handbook of social, economic, and criminal justice. Routledge, New York, NY, p 220–233

Werth R, Ballestero A (2017) Ethnography and the governance of il/legality: some methodological and analytical reflections. Soc Justice 44(1):10–35

Wodda A, Panfil VR (2015) “Don’t talk to me about deception”: the necessary erosion of the trans* panic defense. Albany Law Rev 78:927–971

Woods JB (2014) “Queering criminology”: overview of the state of the field. In: Peterson D, Panfil VR (eds) Handbook of LGBT communities, crime, and justice. Springer, New York, NY, p 15–41

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA

Vanessa R. Panfil

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vanessa R. Panfil .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Panfil, V.R. Young and unafraid: queer criminology’s unbounded potential. Palgrave Commun 4 , 110 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0165-x

Download citation

Received : 30 April 2018

Accepted : 07 August 2018

Published : 04 September 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0165-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Out of the closet and onto the olympic floor: a qualitative look at social media user’s perceptions of transgender olympic athletes.

• Susana Avalos
• MacKenzie Kibler
• Elizabeth Monk-Turner

Gender Issues (2022)

Experiences of Trans Scholars in Criminology and Criminal Justice

• Allyn Walker
• Jace Valcore
• Ash Stephens

Critical Criminology (2021)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Criminal Justice System Research Paper Topics

This page provides a comprehensive list of criminal justice system research paper topics , organized into 10 categories. It also offers expert advice on how to choose a topic, as well as tips on how to write a successful research paper. In addition, iResearchNet provides custom writing services tailored to the specific needs of students, offering top-quality papers written by expert degree-holding writers with experience in the criminal justice field. With flexible pricing options, timely delivery, and 24/7 support, iResearchNet is the perfect solution for students looking to excel in their academic pursuits.

Criminal Justice System Research Guide

The criminal justice system is a crucial aspect of society that aims to maintain law and order while providing fair and impartial justice for all. As a result, research on the criminal justice system covers a wide range of topics, from the agencies and processes involved in criminal justice to the legal principles and ethical concerns that underpin the system.

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

In this guide, we will explore various categories of criminal justice research paper topics, providing an overview of the key issues and debates in each area. We will also offer expert advice on how to select a topic and write a successful research paper, as well as introduce iResearchNet’s writing services for students who require assistance in their academic pursuits.

The criminal justice system is a complex network of institutions, policies, and practices designed to maintain social order and uphold the law. Studying the criminal justice system can be fascinating and thought-provoking, as it involves the examination of the ways in which society seeks to prevent and respond to criminal behavior. In this section, we will explore ten categories of criminal justice system research paper topics, each with ten topics, that will help students to dive into this fascinating field and develop a deeper understanding of its workings.

Corrections

• The effectiveness of rehabilitation programs in reducing recidivism
• The impact of solitary confinement on mental health and behavior of inmates
• The use of private prisons and their impact on the criminal justice system
• The ethics of for-profit prisons and their impact on prisoners’ rights
• The impact of restorative justice practices on offenders and victims
• The use of alternative sentencing programs as an alternative to incarceration
• The impact of parole and probation on recidivism rates
• The effectiveness of drug treatment programs in reducing substance abuse among inmates
• The relationship between prison overcrowding and inmate violence
• The impact of technology on the future of corrections, such as electronic monitoring and virtual reality rehabilitation programs

Criminal Investigation

• Forensic science techniques in criminal investigations
• The role of eyewitness testimony in criminal investigations
• Interviewing techniques for obtaining information from suspects and witnesses
• The use of surveillance technology in criminal investigations
• The challenges of investigating digital and cybercrime
• The use of informants and undercover operations in criminal investigations
• The role of DNA evidence in criminal investigations
• Cold case investigations and the use of new technology and techniques
• Investigating organized crime and criminal networks
• The impact of community policing on criminal investigations

Criminal Justice Administration

• Leadership and management in criminal justice organizations
• Budgeting and resource allocation in criminal justice agencies
• Ethics and integrity in criminal justice administration
• Personnel and human resource management in criminal justice organizations
• Public relations and community outreach in criminal justice agencies
• Policies and procedures in criminal justice administration
• Organizational change and adaptation in criminal justice agencies
• Accountability and performance measurement in criminal justice
• Information technology and criminal justice administration
• Interagency collaboration and coordination in criminal justice

Criminal Justice Ethics

• Use of force by law enforcement officers
• Racial profiling and discrimination in the criminal justice system
• Police misconduct and accountability
• Capital punishment and the ethics of the death penalty
• The ethics of plea bargaining
• Confidentiality and privacy concerns in criminal investigations
• The ethics of surveillance and monitoring in criminal justice
• Ethics of punishment and rehabilitation
• The use of informants and witness protection programs
• Professional ethics and conflicts of interest in the criminal justice system

Criminal Law and Procedure

• The right to counsel and its implications for criminal defendants
• The role of plea bargaining in the criminal justice system
• The use of eyewitness testimony in criminal trials
• The effectiveness of the insanity defense in criminal cases
• The impact of the Fourth Amendment on search and seizure procedures
• The use of technology in criminal investigations and trials
• The role of juries in criminal trials
• The impact of mandatory minimum sentencing laws on the criminal justice system
• The impact of race and ethnicity on criminal law and procedure
• The implications of wrongful convictions for criminal law and procedure

Forensic Science

• The use of DNA evidence in criminal investigations
• The effectiveness of forensic psychology in criminal investigations
• The application of ballistics in solving crimes
• The role of forensic anthropology in identifying human remains
• The use of toxicology in determining cause of death in homicides
• The reliability of fingerprint evidence in criminal cases
• The use of digital forensics in modern criminal investigations
• The challenges and limitations of arson investigation
• The role of forensic entomology in determining time of death
• The accuracy and admissibility of bite mark evidence in criminal trials

Court System

• The role of judges in the court system
• The impact of jury selection on trial outcomes
• The use of plea bargaining in the court system
• The role of defense attorneys in the court system
• The impact of race and ethnicity on court proceedings
• The use of expert witnesses in court proceedings
• The effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution methods in the court system
• The impact of technology on court procedures
• The role of court administrators in the court system
• The future of the court system in light of changing societal needs and values

Juvenile Justice

• The effectiveness of rehabilitation programs for juvenile offenders
• The impact of the juvenile justice system on minority youth
• The role of the family in preventing juvenile delinquency
• Juvenile waiver and transfer laws
• The impact of the age of criminal responsibility on the juvenile justice system
• The relationship between child abuse and juvenile delinquency
• The use of restorative justice practices in juvenile justice
• The impact of school discipline policies on juvenile justice involvement
• The effectiveness of juvenile diversion programs
• The role of mental health services in addressing juvenile delinquency

Law Enforcement

• Community policing and its effectiveness
• Use of force by law enforcement and its impact on communities
• Racial profiling and its effect on police-community relations
• Police accountability and transparency
• Law enforcement response to domestic violence
• The role of technology in modern policing
• Police training and its impact on officers’ use of force
• Challenges of policing in a diverse society
• The impact of mental health on police work
• Policing and immigration enforcement
• Use of force policies in policing
• Police training and its impact on behavior
• Community-oriented policing strategies
• Racial profiling in law enforcement
• The role of technology in policing
• Challenges in recruiting and retaining diverse police officers
• The impact of police unions on accountability and reform efforts
• The militarization of police and its effects on community relations
• The history and evolution of modern policing

The criminal justice system is a multifaceted and complex field that encompasses a wide range of topics and issues. From law enforcement and corrections to the court system and juvenile justice, there is no shortage of research paper topics for students studying criminal justice. By selecting a topic that aligns with their personal interests and adheres to assignment guidelines, students can successfully craft a well-researched and thought-provoking paper. iResearchNet offers expert writing services to assist students in achieving their academic goals and producing high-quality research papers. With our team of experienced writers, reliable sources, and flexible pricing options, students can rest assured that their paper will be completed with precision and excellence.

Choosing a Criminal Justice System Research Paper Topic

Choosing a topic in the multitude of criminal justice system research paper topics can be a daunting task, given the vast range of issues and concerns in this field. However, with careful consideration of your interests, current events, and the assignment guidelines, you can identify a topic that is both relevant and engaging. Here are some expert tips to help you choose a topic for your criminal justice research paper:

• Understand the assignment requirements and guidelines : The first step in choosing a research paper topic is to read and understand the assignment requirements and guidelines provided by your instructor. This will help you to identify the scope, length, and focus of your paper.
• Consider your personal interests and passions : It is important to choose a topic that you are interested in and passionate about. This will keep you motivated throughout the research and writing process, and help you to produce a more engaging and insightful paper.
• Look for current and relevant topics in the field : Criminal justice is a dynamic field that is constantly evolving. Look for current and relevant topics in the news or academic journals that interest you.
• Focus on a specific aspect or issue within a broader topic : Choose a specific aspect or issue within a broader topic to make your research more manageable and focused. For example, rather than writing a paper on “crime prevention,” you could focus on “the effectiveness of community policing in crime prevention.”
• Conduct preliminary research to ensure there is enough information available : Before finalizing your topic, conduct some preliminary research to ensure that there is enough information available on your chosen topic. This will help you to avoid frustration and ensure that you can write a well-supported research paper.
• Consult with your instructor or a librarian for topic suggestions and resources : Don’t hesitate to consult with your instructor or a librarian for suggestions and resources on criminal justice research paper topics. They can provide valuable guidance and insights to help you choose a topic that is appropriate and engaging.
• Stay organized and keep track of sources and notes : As you conduct your research, make sure to stay organized and keep track of your sources and notes. This will make it easier to write your paper and ensure that you can properly cite your sources.
• Narrow down your topic and develop a thesis statement : Once you have chosen a topic, narrow it down to a specific research question or thesis statement. This will help you to focus your research and ensure that your paper has a clear and concise argument.
• Brainstorm and outline your paper before writing : Before diving into writing, take the time to brainstorm and outline your paper. This will help you to organize your thoughts and ensure that your paper flows logically and coherently.
• Revise and edit your paper multiple times before submitting : Finally, be sure to revise and edit your paper multiple times before submitting it. This will help you to catch any errors or inconsistencies and ensure that your paper is polished and professional.

By following these expert tips, you can choose a criminal justice system research paper topic that is engaging, informative, and well-supported by research.

How to Write a Criminal Justice System Research Paper

Writing a criminal justice system research paper can be a daunting task for many students, but with proper guidance and preparation, it can become a manageable and rewarding experience. In this section, we will provide an in-depth guide on how to write a criminal justice system research paper, including the necessary steps and tips for success.

• Choose a topic : The first step in writing a criminal justice system research paper is to select a topic. Your topic should be focused and relevant to the criminal justice system, and should be interesting and engaging to both you and your audience. It is important to choose a topic that is neither too broad nor too narrow, and that can be adequately researched within the scope of your assignment.
• Conduct research : Once you have chosen your topic, it is time to conduct research. This involves gathering information and data related to your topic from a variety of sources, including books, academic articles, government reports, and other credible sources. It is important to ensure that your sources are reliable, up-to-date, and relevant to your topic.
• Develop a thesis statement : A thesis statement is a one-sentence statement that summarizes the main argument or point of your paper. Your thesis statement should be clear, concise, and specific, and should be based on the research and evidence you have gathered.
• Create an outline : Before you start writing your paper, it is helpful to create an outline. An outline is a structured plan that outlines the main points and sections of your paper, and helps you organize your thoughts and ideas. Your outline should include an introduction, body, and conclusion, as well as specific sections for each of the main points you want to make in your paper.
• Write your paper : With your research, thesis statement, and outline in hand, it is time to start writing your paper. Your paper should be structured, clear, and concise, with a clear introduction, well-supported arguments in the body, and a strong conclusion that summarizes your main points and reinforces your thesis.
• Edit and revise : Once you have written your paper, it is important to edit and revise it carefully. This involves checking for errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation, as well as ensuring that your arguments are clear, concise, and well-supported by your research.
• Cite your sources : Finally, it is important to properly cite your sources using the appropriate citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). This involves including in-text citations in your paper and a list of references or bibliography at the end of your paper.

By following these steps and tips, you can write a successful criminal justice system research paper that is well-researched, well-organized, and well-supported. Remember to give yourself enough time to complete each step thoroughly, and to seek help from your instructor or a writing center if you need it.

Custom Writing Services by iResearchNet

At iResearchNet, we understand that crafting a high-quality criminal justice research paper can be a daunting task. Our team of expert writers is here to assist you with any aspect of the writing process, from selecting a topic to polishing your final draft. Here are some of the benefits of using our writing services for your criminal justice research paper:

• Custom written works tailored to your specific needs and requirements: Our writers are experienced in the field of criminal justice and can provide customized solutions that meet your academic requirements.
• Expert degree-holding writers with experience in the criminal justice field: Our writers hold advanced degrees in criminal justice, and have years of experience in researching and writing on topics related to the criminal justice system.
• In-depth research using credible sources: Our writers conduct thorough research using reliable sources to ensure that your paper is well-supported and informative.
• Custom formatting (APA, MLA, Chicago/Turabian, Harvard): We offer custom formatting to fit any citation style requirements and ensure that your paper meets the highest academic standards.
• Top quality work with customized solutions : Our writers provide high-quality work with customized solutions that meet your specific needs and requirements.
• Flexible pricing options to fit any budget: We offer flexible pricing options to fit any budget, and can provide quotes based on your specific needs.
• Short deadlines of up to 3 hours: We understand that deadlines can be tight, which is why we offer short turnaround times of up to 3 hours for urgent orders.
• Timely delivery of your completed paper: We are committed to delivering your completed paper on time, every time.
• 24/7 customer support for any questions or concerns: Our customer support team is available 24/7 to answer any questions or concerns you may have about our services.
• Absolute privacy and confidentiality of your personal and academic information: We take your privacy and confidentiality seriously, and will never share your personal or academic information with anyone.
• Easy order tracking and updates: Our user-friendly platform allows you to track your order status and receive updates on your paper’s progress.
• Money-back guarantee if you are not satisfied with the final product: We are committed to your satisfaction, and offer a money-back guarantee if you are not completely satisfied with the final product.

At iResearchNet, we pride ourselves on providing high-quality, customized writing services to students in need of assistance with their criminal justice research papers. Contact us today to learn more about how we can help you achieve your academic goals.

Buy Your Custom Research Paper Today!

The criminal justice system is a vast and complex field that offers a multitude of research paper topics. Choosing a topic requires careful consideration of personal interests and the assignment guidelines, as well as the availability of credible sources. Proper research, organization, and writing skills are essential for crafting a successful criminal justice research paper. At iResearchNet, we offer expert writing services to assist students in achieving their academic goals and producing high-quality research papers. Our team of degree-holding writers has extensive experience in the criminal justice field and can provide custom-written works tailored to your specific needs and requirements. We conduct in-depth research using reliable sources and provide custom formatting options to fit any citation style. We offer flexible pricing options to fit any budget and can accommodate short deadlines of up to 3 hours. Our 24/7 customer support is available for any questions or concerns, and we guarantee absolute privacy and confidentiality of your personal and academic information. With our easy order tracking and updates, you can stay informed throughout the writing process, and our money-back guarantee ensures your satisfaction with the final product.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

COVID, Crime & Criminal Justice: Affirming the Call for System Reform Research

Mckenzie l. jossie.

1 University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611 USA

Alfred Blumstein

2 Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA

J. Mitchell Miller

3 University of North Florida, Jacksonville, FL 32224 USA

Early into the COVID-19 pandemic, Miller & Blumstein (2020) outlined a theoretical research program (TRP) oriented around themes of contagion control and containment, legal amnesty, system leniency, nonenforcement, and tele-justice. Here, two and a half years later, these lingering themes are revisited to advocate for empirical research informing criminal justice system reform. The pandemic created rare natural experiment research conditions that enable unique and potentially valuable insights on necessitated innovations that may indicate future justice practices and policies. Given the sweeping effects of the shutdown, examples are numerous ranging from staffing analyses to estimate agencies’ personnel needs to ensure that basic public safety functions can be met after early retirements and resignations from virus risk and anti-police sentiment, the use of virtual communication in various legal proceedings at arrest, incarceration, and release junctures, and, especially, the risks versus benefits of early release. In addition to better identifying who should be jailed pre-trial, prioritization of calls for service, triaging of court cases, and hygiene and sanitation issues within facilities are other important examples central to a COVID and crime TRP. Attending research could demonstrate the utility of normative operations and identify shortfalls to be addressed during anomic conditions prior to another shutdown or similar event and present, through comparison of innovative and traditional derived outcomes, system reform and improvement opportunities. By seizing upon rare data made possible by natural experimental COVID generated conditions, researchers can meaningfully investigate the ongoing applicability of justice system adaptations mandated by the pandemic in terms of effectiveness and efficiency toward the interrelated goals of evidence-based practice discovery and justice reform.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic induced a variety of major changes to the operation of criminal justice systems both in the United States and internationally as indicated by a quickly emergent and still growing COVID crime and justice literature (Baldwin et al., 2020 ; Buchanan et al., 2020 ; Campedelli et al., 2021 ; Jennings & Perez, 2020 ; Marcum, 2020 ; Piquero et al., 2021 ; Reid & Baglivio, 2022 ; Viglione et al., 2020 ; Wenger et al., 2022 ). Near the beginning of the pandemic, we suggested a framework encapsulating the intersection of COVID, crime, criminal justice, and related research needs to inform system improvement and potential reform opportunities (Miller & Blumstein, 2020 ). This synopsis identified justice themes integral to the virus control-justice nexus, including 1) general disengagement by law enforcement except for serious crimes, 2) attempts to reduce risks of contagion among prisoners and correctional staff, 3) a search for reasonable opportunities for amnesty through home confinement, and 4) tele-justice reliance, particularly for courts. The pandemic forced modifications in daily operations throughout the justice apparatus that, in turn, present opportunities for a reform-oriented TRP with clear pragmatic implications.

A considerable amount of literature on crime and justice during COVID has already emerged, including an initial pandemic themed issue of the American Journal of Criminal Justice (Volume 45, Issue 4, August 2020) in 2020 followed by issues in Victims & Offenders ( Volume 15, Issue 7–8, 2020 ) , Criminology & Public Policy (Volume 20, Issue 3, August 2021), Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice (Volume 37, Issue 4, November 2021), Current Issues in Criminal Justice (Volume 33, Issue 1, 2021), and International Criminology (Volume 2, Issue 1, March 2022). Collectively, these journals, along with COVID-focused articles in additional journals, cover a broad range of crime and justice topics, although justice reform is a distinct common theme.

COVID-19 mandated responses across the three major prongs of the criminal justice system as well as for offender programming (e.g., substance abuse and mental health treatment, employment and housing assistance, medical care, and legal assistance). Many of the changes that have transpired since COVID signal research opportunities for system betterment in terms of effectiveness and efficiency. This commentary revisits central issues identified in Miller and Blumstein ( 2020 ) and by other scholars to reaffirm awareness of the one-off nature of COVID research opportunities to inform meaningful change with urgency before necessary time sensitive data lapses beyond capture. The pandemic prompted novel enforcement of social gatherings and violations of social distancing, masking, and similar restrictions, but also prompted many additional adaptations to normal system operations that may provide more effective approaches for operations and crime control policy more generally.

While COVID research invites system reform consideration, this applied focus has theoretical symmetry to frame studies. The virus gave rise to lockdowns, stay-at-home orders, and social distancing regulations, as well as business restrictions and total closures, widespread unemployment, and disrupted life routines with people trapped at home under anomic conditions. These conditions and lifestyle changes necessitated by the pandemic directly point to the basic tenets of routine activities theory—motivated offenders, suitable targets, and absence of capable guardianship (Cohen & Felson, 1979 )—as all of these were virus affected. Reduced and nonenforcement for lesser crimes, bail amnesty, reluctance to incarcerate, and prisoner release are but a few more examples of opportunities to empirically investigate and reaffirm system deterrent effects generally, and recidivism relative to community release, specifically. Below, we briefly describe crime trends during COVID before turning to more in-depth consideration of reform and enhancement opportunities across the justice apparatus.

Crime During COVID

Preliminary studies during the pandemic identified overall changes in crime, although crime rates appear to differ unequally across type, place, and time (Stickle & Felson, 2020 ). An early study examining the effects of stay-at-home orders on crime rates in San Francisco and Oakland identified overall decreases in crime by about 43% and 50%, respectively, following implementation of restrictive orders (Shayegh & Malpede, 2020 ). Findings from Vancouver, Canada are similar, with total crime decreasing despite previous trends suggesting the contrary (Hodgkinson & Andresen, 2020 ).

Nuanced empirical examination of crime rates is necessary given disproportionate impacts by crime type (Stickle & Felson, 2020 ). Perhaps the most serious crime problem during COVID was increased homicide. A study examining crime rates in 34 cities in the U.S., as well as the FBI’s 2020 Uniform Crime Report, found that homicide rates were 30% higher in 2020 compared to the year prior, a historic increase, although remaining well below peak homicide rates in the early 1990s (Rosenfeld et al., 2021 ). Homicide rates further increased by 5% in 2021, compared to 2020, according to a follow-up study that examined 27 cities within the U.S (Rosenfeld & Lopez, 2022 ). Homicide also increased, especially in Chicago, after stay-at-home orders and the easing of social distancing ordinances along with other large U.S. cities starting in June 2020 (Kim & McCarty, 2021 ; Lopez & Rosenfeld, 2021 ). While there is no single explanation for the homicide increase, a spike in firearms purchases at the beginning of the pandemic and protests about police violence are hypothesized to have had an impact (Rosenfeld et al., 2021 ). However, a 2022 mid-year report suggests that 6-month homicide rates actually decreased by 2% between 2021 and 2022 (Rosenfeld et al., 2022 ).

Other aspects of domestic violence also increased following stay-at-home orders in the early months of the pandemic (Boman & Gallupe, 2020 ; Kaukinen, 2020 ; Piquero et al., 2020 ). An analysis of calls for service to police and emergency hotlines estimated that the pandemic-era produced an increase of approximately 2,700 domestic violence related calls from March to October 2020 in seven cities (Baltimore, Cincinnati, Hartford, Orlando, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, and St. Petersburg) (Richards et al., 2021 ) and another study estimated that domestic violence rose about 8% in the U.S., overall (Piquero et al., 2021 ). This domestic violence-COVID relationship remains questionable, however, as a comparison of end-of-year domestic violence rates among 12 cities in 2019 and 2020 indicated little, if any, increase (Rosenfeld et al., 2021 ) and the Dallas findings have been compromised through challenge (Reingle Gonzalez et al., 2020 ).

Hate crimes increased against Asian Americans, who are significantly less likely to report such crimes to the police in comparison to non-Asian victims (about 53% less likely), suggesting victimization is higher than observed (Gover et al., 2020 ; Lantz & Wenger, 2021 ; Tessler et al., 2020 ). Household property crimes decreased, presumably due to increased guardianship via additional home presence, while other types of crime like fraud and cybercrime increased (Kennedy et al., 2021 ; Lopez & Rosenfeld, 2021 ; Payne, 2020 ; Rosenfeld et al., 2021 ). There was also an impressive drop in robbery (presumably fewer people on the street to be victimized) and residential burglary during the pandemic (Koppel et al., 2022 ; Lopez & Rosenfeld, 2021 ; Rosenfeld et al., 2021 ). Gun violence increased, a trend that was not seen in most other countries (Kim & Phillips, 2021 ; Lopez & Rosenfeld, 2021 ), commercial burglary logically increased during stay-at-home orders (Hodgkinson & Andresen, 2020 ), and drug offense rates decreased (Byrne et al., 2020 ; Lopez & Rosenfeld, 2021 ; Rosenfeld et al., 2021 ). This major decrease in arrests for drug crimes (30% decrease from 2019 to 2020 and 12% decrease from 2020 to 2021), is largely because of the general decrease in law enforcement manpower resulting from COVID contamination (Rosenfeld et al., 2021 ; Rosenfeld & Lopez, 2022 ; Vose et al., 2020b ).

Scholars have also noted a continuation of traditional spatial crime pattern variation. An examination of arrests for violent crime during the stay-at-home orders in Miami-Dade County, for example, found incidents were primarily embedded in disadvantaged minority neighborhoods (Moise & Piquero, 2021 ). In fact, many of the areas that experienced increased crime since the beginning of the pandemic are officially designated economically disadvantaged areas that had high levels of unemployment and were broken windows locales already. Due to COVID, however, scholars have hypothesized that the pandemic only worsened existing concentrated disadvantage with increased crime an ostensible expectation (Gibbs et al., 2022 ; Kantamneni, 2020 ). Similarly, in-depth qualitative interviews with youth workers in Lansing, Michigan documented disadvantaged communities were seemingly facing the brunt of pandemic consequences (Gibbs et al., 2022 ). In another attempt to examine spatial change in violent crime, an examination of shooting violence in Buffalo, New York, following the implementation of stay-at-home orders, found that geographic hot spots of gun violence did not change but there was an increase in shootings in those areas (Drake et al., 2022 ). Yet another examination of New York City boroughs found similarities regarding the impact of stay-at-home orders on gun violence among all five boroughs, although following the George Floyd protests shootings decreased in one (Staten Island) while rising in others (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, and Queens) (Wolff et al., 2022 ). Comparable trends were also found for gang crime in Los Angeles following stay-at-home orders, with gang-related crime and geographical positioning remaining unchanged (Brantingham et al., 2021 ).

The Justice Apparatus During COVID

The decline in crime noted above reflect, in part, a reduction in calls for police service compared to pre-pandemic data—likely due to both less minor crime and intentional agency de-prioritization of certain crimes (Boman & Gallupe, 2020 ; Jennings & Perez, 2020 ), especially patrol encounters but also officer-initiated activities common in detective and narcotics work. Early studies during COVID reporting decreases in overall crime and calls for service may be deceiving, though, as the use of quarantine, stay-at-home orders, and lockdowns, while fundamental to reducing disease transmission, was not categorically advantageous and in some ways counterproductive regarding certain crimes. It is also likely that fear of contagion resulted in many incidents being addressed informally and victimization experienced without a report to police that would otherwise have involved the justice system.

The foremost observed impact of COVID across the criminal justice system has been staffing attrition (Vose et al., 2020b ). Reductions in functional staff sizes associated with the contagion of COVID-19 across justice systems and wrap-around components is a lingering problem that pre-dates the virus that has only exponentially worsened a general manpower shortfall, most notably for law enforcement. Many police departments across the nation, especially in rural areas where the loss of even a few personnel represent a considerable percentage of the force, faced dire staffing shortages. An already strained manpower problem was exacerbated by officer absenteeism due to COVID related issues (i.e., infection, quarantine, hospitalization, death). COVID also prompted early retirements, and an unprecedented decline in applicants and recruits (Lum et al., 2020a , b ). Devastating impacts of the pandemic persist with over 300 officer deaths in 2021 due to COVID-19 (the leading cause of officer death in 2021) and over 600 COVID-related deaths since March 2020 (National Law Enforcement Memorial and Museum, 2021 ). The shortage of law enforcement officers is the most intuitive explanation for increased forms of theft and violence such as open-air property crime and broad daylight shoplifting and ransacking of retail stores by mobs in urban centers often on the heels of nationally profiled police shootings providing a degree of blur between protestors and street thugs (Pyrooz et al., 2016 ; Wolff et al., 2022 ).

Crime spikes have led to renewed interest in determining the number of law enforcement officers really needed (Vose et al., 2020b ). The Kansas City Preventative Patrol Experiment framed the question of "officers needed" under the premise that increasing police presence pushes crime detection and arrest, mostly vice and morality infractions, from one place to another within a jurisdiction but only minimally and temporarily reduces crime overall. Somewhat opposite, COVID has reframed the question of “officers needed” to: What is the minimum number of officers needed to deter crime surges as well as provide basic police services?

Throughout the courts, staffing shortages have resulted in courthouses being open for limited hours or closed altogether which have culminated in subsequent delays in case processing. Adequate staffing within corrections agencies was also already a recurrent issue with the pandemic again only exacerbating the problem. High absence rates became pronounced among correctional officers and staff with vacancy rates in some locales exceeding 20% (Nowotny et al., 2021 ; Wetzel & Davis, 2020 ). Correctional staff were much more likely to test positive for the virus in comparison to the general public per COVID data from April 2020-January 2021 (Nowotny et al., 2021 ) and, within U.S. state and federal prison systems there have been 210,079 COVID-19 cases among prison staff with 278 resulting deaths as of July 1, 2022 (Byrne et al., 2020 ; Nowotny et al., 2021 ; The COVID Prison Project, 2022 ). The virus also compelled changes that yielded unintended consequences such as partial amnesty that postured law enforcement, the courts, and community corrections for rare empirical insights into atypical and novel practices for further consideration.

Law Enforcement

At the beginning of the pandemic, many agencies advised officers to avoid non-essential interaction with the public thereby essentially ending officer-initiated activities and decreased traffic stops to, in turn, reduce jail overcrowding (Jennings & Perez, 2020 ; Leal et al., 2021 ; Lum et al., 2020a , b ; Mohler et al., 2020 ). Research analyzing arrests after the imposition of stay-at-home orders in Boston, Charleston, Pittsburgh, and San Francisco found the most prominent rates of decrease to be among drug arrests (54%) (Jahn et al., 2022 ). The majority of U.S. citizens report supporting de-emphasizing drug enforcement (54%), while similar proportions support the enforcement of ordinances pertaining to social distancing (52%) and the prohibition of large gatherings (55%) (Nix et al., 2021 ). On the contrary, many in law enforcement argue that enforcing stay-at-home orders is a poor use of resources although many did enforce lockdown orders and social distancing ordinances (White & Fradella, 2020 ). While trying to ensure safety while avoiding proximity with community members during heightened anti-police sentiment and racial strife from the BLM movement, many urban agencies were forced to manage riots, protests, and major calls for service while coronavirus remained an active threat (Jaffe et al., 2021 ; Lum et al., 2020a , b ; Stogner et al., 2020 ).

With the implementation of stay-at-home orders, courts hastily transitioned to online formats, with delays or closings creating a backlog of cases and trials. They implemented procedural changes to limit contagion, most notably suspension of in-person court hearings and transition to virtual court proceedings, that were accompanied with online court security concerns, jury selection and deliberations, and technology functionality (Baldwin et al., 2020 ; Byrne et al., 2020 ). The utilization of a technological environment was an easier transition for some court responsibilities in comparison to others, which resulted in courts triaging or prioritizing the most critical cases (Baldwin et al., 2020 ). Other general adaptations included changes to the frequency of drug tests and holding staffing meetings virtually (Baldwin et al., 2020 ; Hartsell & Lane, 2022 ). This use of technology among the courts has the potential to make court proceedings more efficient and convenient as we move back into normal operations, suggesting perhaps we should not.

Prior to the pandemic, over 95% of criminal convictions were a result of guilty pleas in the United States (Reaves, 2013 ); during the pandemic, the nature of plea bargaining changed due to COVID. The use of plea bargaining has increased in response to the pandemic, which has only exacerbated existing concerns regarding coercion such as pressure to accept a plea deal to avoid jail time due to COVID conditions (Baldwin et al., 2020 ). In a survey of 93 U.S. defense attorneys, most agreed that plea bargaining changed during the pandemic (Daftary-Kapur et al., 2021 ) with observations of both atypical degrees of leniency and punitiveness (Daftary-Kapur et al., 2021 ). An experimental study utilized a computer simulation to explore the impact of the pandemic on plea bargaining when faced with pre-trial detention. Among a sample of 704 individuals, the participants (whether guilty or not) were more likely to accept a guilty plea to avoid exposure to the virus (Wilford et al., 2021 ). Interestingly, COVID concerns had a larger influence on those that were innocent (and accepted a plea) in comparison to those that were guilty. Plea bargaining before, and even more so during, the pandemic likely generated systematic disproportionate outcomes always of interest to, especially critical, criminologists.

Corrections

COVID exacerbated the spread of the virus among incarcerated individuals, as well as individuals employed at correctional institutions (Wallace et al., 2021 ). Correctional workers, in fact, have been found far more likely than the general public and twice more likely than other criminal justice practitioners to have contracted the virus (Nowotny et al., 2021 ). Within U.S. state and federal prisons, as of July 1, 2022, there were 596,281 COVID-19 cases among inmates and 2,899 resulting deaths according to recent data from The COVID Prison Project ( 2022 ), although it is likely these losses are underestimated (Byrne et al., 2020 ; Nowotny et al., 2021 ).

In an attempt to limit the transmission of the virus among the incarcerated, jails and prisons released individuals where possible that many interpreted as generalized amnesty. Within the U.S. in particular, early release mechanisms were frequently used as a back-end mitigation strategy (Byrne et al., 2020 ). Many jails reduced their inmate populations, prisons halted the transfer of inmates from jails, and state and federal prisons released over 100,000 individuals (from March 2020-June 2020) – collectively representing an 11.8% decrease among the overall inmate population (March 2020-August 2020) (ACLU Analytics, 2020 ; Byrne et al., 2020 ; Collica-Cox & Molina, 2020 ; Hummer, 2020 ; Sharma et al., 2020 ). Staff reviewed offender populations to identify those incarcerated for technical violations and low-level offenses for early release consideration, while similar reviews took place for inmates at increased risk of contracting COVID such as prisoners of advanced age and the immunocompromised (Abraham et al., 2020 ; Marcum, 2020 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ). The risk-need-responsivity and similar models should guide targeted release in order to identify those that pose the least public safety risk, while reducing crowding within institutions to limit the spread of the virus (Vose et al., 2020a ). In the wake of more empirical work surrounding decarceration and the need to address overcrowding within correctional facilities, if individuals released early represent a minimal threat to public safety, evaluation of the consequences of these release policies provide an opportunity for future sentencing policy reform.

Regulations implemented among the general society were nearly impossible to carry out without adequate space, such as social distancing, given crowded conditions (Abraham et al., 2020 ; Wallace et al., 2021 ). Unsurprisingly, evidence indicates that overcrowding within U.S. prisons increases transmission rates of COVID-19 (Vest et al., 2021 ). While correctional facilities are no stranger to communicable diseases, COVID compelled a wide range of reactions within jails and prisons in an attempt to reduce the spread of the virus. Institutions employed a variety of mitigation strategies to limit spread, such as the creation of quarantine quarters and suspending offender programming. The spread of the virus especially emphasized the importance of a detox area and mandatory quarantine regulations in a logic of “patient cohorting” (Lemieux et al., 2020 ; Marcum, 2020 ). Among jails in particular, sentences are short and a large portion of individuals are being held pretrial meaning there is a greater level of offender movement within facilities. Toward this end, facilities created spaces for those found to test positive for COVID (hot zones), those awaiting the results of a test (warm zones), and those who do not have the virus (cold zones) (Lemieux et al., 2020 ). Patient cohorting may be useful to control other communicable diseases often found within correctional institutions, such as tuberculosis, hepatitis, and sexually transmitted diseases. With increased isolation periods among inmates and risks surrounding non-essential employees entering facilities, most programming (e.g., education, substance abuse, mental health, employment) in the U.S. faced cancellation (Byrne et al., 2020 ; Lemieux et al., 2020 ; Pyrooz et al., 2020 ). Among facilities that did not cancel programming, the use of technology became integral to maintaining the programs (Collica-Cox & Molina, 2020 ). It would be useful to see evaluations of the changes to measure the degradation, or possible improvement, of such adaptations.

In an effort to further reduce contagion most, if not all, jails and prisons adopted restrictions to face-to-face visitation. In fact, an early examination of fifty-one correctional jurisdictions (all fifty states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons) websites indicated that all jurisdictions halted visitation (Marcum, 2020 ; Novisky et al., 2020 ). When examining pandemic impact on correctional systems throughout the world, the most common method to limit movement of the virus into facilities among the five largest countries in the review (U.S., China, Brazil, Russian Federation, and India) was the suspension of visitation (Byrne et al., 2020 ). To offset the suspension of face-to-face visitation, many correctional facilities have provided concessions to allow incarcerated individuals the opportunity to maintain communication with those outside jail and prison walls, including increased access to or free/reduced charges for phone calls, virtual visitation, emails, and stamps (Novisky et al., 2020 ). For example, the Federal Bureau of Prisons gave each individual 500 phone minutes and a New York jail provided free calling cards and video options at a reduced rate (Collica-Cox & Molina, 2020 ; Marcum, 2020 ). In turn, the Westchester County Department of Correction, a county jail in New York State, reported a significant increase in the number of calls from the facility pre-pandemic (1,700) compared to during the pandemic (4,000) (Collica-Cox & Molina, 2020 ). Findings from self-report surveys of incarcerated individuals within a Midwestern medium-security facility indicate that inmates believe such visitation keeps them out of trouble and connected to their support systems (Canada et al., 2022 ). As prisons and jails return to pre-pandemic operations, correctional institutions, and the people they house, may be better served by continuing to make use of technology, such as video conferencing, to facilitate visitation beyond face-to-face or telephone communications.

General hygiene and sanitation were frequently lacking within institutions prior to the pandemic, often including, but not limited to, a general lack of access to hand sanitizer, tissues, and surface disinfectants (Novisky et al., 2021 ). An early examination of fifty-one correctional jurisdictions (all fifty states and the Federal Bureau of Prisons) websites found that while sanitation efforts had increased since the start of the pandemic, endeavors were highly variable across jurisdictions (Novisky et al., 2020 ). Hand sanitizer, for example, was not available in most jurisdictions as it is considered contraband (out of fear that inmates may consume it), with only ten jurisdictions indicating sanitizer was available without restraint. A New York jail advocated for increased sanitation within the facility by adding hand sanitizing stations (Collica-Cox & Molina, 2020 ). There have been calls for correctional institutions to increase the accessibility of hand sanitizers and disinfect high-touch surfaces (e.g., doors, dining hall, shared surfaces) in betterment of public health and criminal justice system operations (Lemieux et al., 2020 ; Novisky et al., 2020 ).

An often-overlooked part of the criminal justice system that was particularly challenged is community corrections, including probation and parole services. Given increased decarceration during COVID, community corrections assumed increased burdens and oversight of multiple services similar to reentry management but on a much larger scale. While new offense management remained largely normative, technical violations were largely handled informally with clear revocation emphasis on violations that endanger the public (Powell et al., 2022 ). Among a sample of community corrections agencies in the U.S., 75% reported a decrease in the processing of technical violations (Viglione et al., 2020 ) – important data supporting calls for a moratorium on incarcerating many otherwise revocable offenses or individuals (Byrne et al., 2020 ; Marcum, 2020 ).

Reduced client contact and in-person interaction seemed to present client accountability issues including limited and irregular drug testing due to social distancing concerns and testing business closures, fewer revocations due to the case backlogs, decreased attention to minor violations, and the restriction of incapacitation as a sanction as many jails refused to incarcerate for probation violations or judges would not sentence individuals to incarceration (Cohen & Starr, 2021 ; Viglione et al., 2020 ). Treatment courts also faced challenges imposed by the pandemic due to the transition to online and hybrid formats. At the Marion County, Florida, Diversion Drug Court, for example, zoom interviews and meetings were convenient for clients (e.g., transportation to court was a non-issue) and court staff (Hartsell & Lane, 2022 ) but somewhat offset by poor internet connections, difficulties checking in with those in jail, and home distractions during sessions—all of which would be irrelevant with traditional in-person hearings.

With the issuance of stay-at-home orders, the implementation of social distance regulations, businesses shutting down, and people staying home, face-to-face meetings with probation and parole officers largely halted at the state and federal levels as officers in many jurisdictions began utilizing video technology or phone calls to check-in with clients. With the goal of understanding supervision strategies before and after the onset of COVID, a survey of 1,054 probation officers in the U.S. indicated that more check-ins were indeed held virtually (Schwalbe & Koetzle, 2021 ) and, in a related study, a survey of 213 community corrections administrators within the U.S. observed that 96% had transferred to telecommunication oversight with a surprising 81% also reporting using video technology (Viglione et al., 2020 ). Among federal probation and pretrial chiefs, phone calls (85%), texting (72%), and video technology (62%) were the primary modes of communication in lieu of face-to-face supervision (Cohen & Starr, 2021 ). As we return to business as usual in an increasingly technological world, virtual communication in community corrections, augmented by personal interaction as needed, can provide more flexible and efficient supervision (Cohen & Starr, 2021 ; Powell et al., 2022 ; Vuolo et al., 2022 ).

Lessons from COVID for Justice Reform and Future Crises

While disruptions of applied criminological research agendas and program evaluations resulted from the pandemic, the offset is the appearance of rare natural experimental conditions. Research opportunities have arisen from COVID that have, in turn, provided opportunities to glean insights about system reform that otherwise would have not been possible or practical. Fortunately, next step needs for applied research to improve policies and operations across the three prongs of the criminal justice system are ample and immediate.

During the pandemic, police dealt with many hardships, including exposure to COVID, protests following stay-at-home orders, and again after the death of George Floyd, adapting practices in many respects. Further research is needed to understand the impact of COVID on officers, including stress and mental health, and also examine the changes that the pandemic had on both short-term and long-term police practices. Given the many pressures facing police during the pandemic, staffing analyses must better estimate staff absence as a function of virus cases and hospitalizations, deaths, as well as early retirements and resignations and how manpower shortages impact police response and reprioritization of crime and service objectives.

As many courts continue to utilize virtual options, they must develop online court participation policies to minimize disruption. Future research must evaluate the effectiveness of such changes, although it will prove difficult given the lack of data tracked regarding COVID among courts or court staff. Research should also consider modifications in jail-holding policies, including pre-trial detention, and sentencing policies to reduce both contagion impacts as well as over-incarceration. Examination of the effectiveness of offender treatment programming adaptions in particular should be recorded, along with the impact on clients given format changes. Other modifications made to court practices that may improve general operations must be evaluated, such as the triaging of cases. We certainly should consider how some of the responses to COVID within the courts may become a part of normal operations moving forward.

Within corrections, we must develop effective vaccine policies and prioritize inmate and staff health given the increased risk of outbreaks within institutions and subsequently communities. As of July 1, 2022, 550,132 inmates and 135,508 staff have received at least one dose of a COVID vaccine (The COVID Prison Project, 2022 ) that should enable examination per comparison of vaccinated and non-vaccinated subpopulations of inmates and prisoners. Future research could meaningfully inform inmate placement via scrutiny of the impact that patient cohorting and discontinuation of programming had on inmate wellbeing, including the influence on mental health, substance use, and programming success (Byrne et al., 2020 ). Early release and home confinement mitigated most virus consequences within facilities, although safe release policies and principles require development with important concerns for public safety, and subsequent crime and recidivism impacts estimated. Other modifications have been made to regular corrections practices that may improve operations and therefore require evaluation, such as which modes of visitation should be offered, standards for general hygiene and sanitation, and telehealth in offender treatment programs.

The release of more individuals into the community can inform the design of reentry principles and programs. While there is no evidence to suggest that early release due to the virus has impacted recidivism, either positively or negatively, data to examine such outcomes is needed but has not been collected (Byrne et al., 2020 ). Although, large-scale early release due to the virus could well reduce aggregate recidivism assuming those released early were carefully reviewed by releasing authorities, the cohort in question might actually pose less risk than those near or at sentencing. In regard to community supervision, future research should also examine the impact of changes in supervision practices such as the continued or sole use of video or phone technology, the effectiveness of such changes with respect to outcomes, and with which individuals this type of supervision is most effective in order to reveal the role of technological advances in reforming probation and parole. The pandemic has illuminated the lack of basic data available about correctional systems, particularly community corrections, in several areas needing improvement in order to rigorously evaluate efficiency and effectiveness (Byrne et al., 2020 ).

Criminal Justice System

Within the criminal justice system more generally, we must collect better data regularly in order to analyze a variety of issues, trends, and the effectiveness of practices. In light of the state of the empirical literature, there is a need for longer follow-up periods to examine crime across type, place, and time, including before, during, and after COVID-19 restrictions. Spatial and temporal concerns must be considered in conjunction with confounding factors, such as protests, the opioid epidemic, and national mental health crisis. We must continue to examine changes in patterns of crime, particularly pertaining to homicide and gun violence, to examine whether there is a relationship between COVID mitigation decisions and related increases. Future research must critically examine data made available to the public, as the pandemic’s impact on the system may impact the quality of data reported and produced. Qualitative research is essential to obtain a clearer view of what is actually happening inside the system and how data, in turn, is impacted. Finally, we must evaluate the effects of prevention measures to examine both positive and negative impacts, along with a broader assessment of newly adopted COVID-era crime prevention efforts.

For criminologists working in the overlapping areas of race, crime, and social justice, the virus again effected disproportionate system experiences across demographics. Across the three prongs of the criminal justice system, the effects of COVID-19 varied by age, race, social class, and gender. Among America’s aging correctional population, many have chronic health conditions that, in conjunction with COVID, presented heightened health risks (Carson & Sabol, 2016 ) which should be weighted in quantitative examinations so as to not overestimate risk for all. Incarcerated individuals are also at a greater risk of transmission in general and Latino and Black inmates are most at risk which is similar to racial inequalities among those supervised in the community (Gutierrez & Patterson, 2021 ). Upon examination of U.S. probation and parole agent COVID cases between May and June of 2020, for example, Latino and Black individuals on supervision were more likely to test positive or suspect infection compared to Whites (Schwalbe & Koetzle, 2021 ) and a survey of state correctional facilities found minority males again at an increased risk of chronic illness and even more so for those with longer sentences, repeat incarcerations, and advanced age (Hughes & Prior, 2021 ). In short, minority males have been found to contract the virus at a rate twice that of White males (Gibson, 2020 ). Correctional scholars can engage COVID-19’s impact and corresponding justice system responses toward elevated social justice within the system per increased scrutiny of treatment per offender age, race, gender, and risk classification.

While COVID influenced law enforcement, courts, and corrections independently, it is also important to consider insights for the entire criminal justice system reform and improvement. In light of the fragmentation of the U.S. justice system, it has long been argued that we must adopt a systems approach that utilizes empirical findings and data as the basis to enacting change to justice policy (Blumstein, 1967 ; Mears, 2017 ). Subsystems, such as law enforcement, courts, and corrections, despite being disintegrated, must work together to accomplish common goals, such as effectiveness and public safety. In line with this systems approach, COVID has shown how subsystems interact in important ways and provides a rare opportunity for the justice system to be reimagined. This reconceptualization might include an increased reliance on evaluation research, the inclusion of different stakeholders in research processes, and a single agency tasked with general system monitoring and oversight (Mears, 2017 , 2019 ). Improvements made to the criminal justice system improve the likelihood that it can accomplish desired goals which are for the common good and should continue to be supported.

COVID is a part of a larger subclass of a broader topic, crises. Moving forward, the COVID crisis has created opportunities to highlight faultiness, issues, and opportunities for reform within the criminal justice system and similar social institutions during anomic circumstances. Moving on it would be helpful to be mindful of crises falling short of a pandemic level but nonetheless useful for conceptualization and anticipation of likely threats and problems.

History suggests that reversion to the ‘status quo’ is likely and a return to pre-pandemic operations probable. In this age of evidence-based practice and system accountability, it is important to beat the metaphorical research drum louder as the natural experimental conditions posed by COVID-19 are time sensitive and data dependent – surely urgency is at a premium regarding data collection and engagement. Most of the topics identified herein remain under-attended if not altogether neglected – research questions and opportunities abound. By conducting rigorous empirical research denoting efficiency and effectiveness opportunities, criminologists can promote and advocate for needed and helpful criminal justice reform through scientific demonstration of preferable outcomes for offenders and the public in what very well may be a once in a lifetime situation.

Biographies

(M.S., 2019, University of North Florida) is a Doctoral Student at the University of Florida in the Department of Sociology and Criminology & Law. Her primary research areas include corrections, collateral consequences of justice system involvement, program evaluation, and criminal justice policy.

is a University Professor and the J. Erik Jonsson Professor of Urban Systems and Operations Research Emeritus and former Dean (from 1986 to 1993) at the H. John Heinz III College of Public Policy and Management of Carnegie Mellon University. He has had extensive experience in both research and policy with the criminal justice system since serving the President’s Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice in 1966-67 as Director of its Task Force on Science and Technology. Dr. Blumstein was a member of the National Academy of Sciences Committee on Research on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice from its founding in 1975 until 1986. He served as Chairman of that Committee between 1979 and 1984, and has chaired the committee`s panels on Research on Deterrent and Incapacitative Effects, on Sentencing Research, and on Research on Criminal Careers. He was a member of the Academy’s Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education from 1994-2000. In 1998, he was elected to membership in the National Academy of Engineering. His degrees from Cornell University include a Bachelor of Engineering Physics and a Ph.D. in Operations Research. He was awarded an honorary degree of Doctor of Laws by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice of the City University of New York. His research over the past thirty years has covered many aspects of criminal-justice phenomena and policy, including crime measurement, criminal careers, sentencing, deterrence and incapacitation, prison population, demographic trends, juvenile violence, and drug policy.

is the John A. Delaney Presidential Professor in the Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice at the University of North Florida. An ACJS Fellow, ASC Oral History Project Inductee, and 38th President of the Southern Criminal Justice Association, he was recognized by his alma mater, Middle Tennessee State University, with the 2021 Outstanding Alumni Award. His research engages the drugs and crime nexus, offender treatment, program evaluation, and law enforcement staffing analysis. He is currently conducting evaluations of substance abuse and justice mental health interventions for the US Bureau of Justice Assistance and developing an enhanced mixed methods staffing calculation model for the US COPS Office.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

McKenzie L. Jossie, Email: ude.lfu@eissojm .

Alfred Blumstein, Email: ude.umc.werdna@q0ba .

J. Mitchell Miller, Email: [email protected] .

• Abraham, L. A., Brown, T. C., & Thomas, S. A. (2020). How COVID-19’s disruption of the U.S. correctional system provides an opportunity for decarceration. American Journal of Criminal Justice , 45 (4), 780–792. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• ACLU Analytics. (2020). Decarceration and crime during COVID-19. American Civil Liberties Union.
• Baldwin JM, Eassey JM, Brooke EJ. Court operations during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):743–758. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09553-1. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blumstein A. Systems analysis and the criminal justice system. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 1967; 374 (1):92–100. doi: 10.1177/000271626737400109. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boman JH, Gallupe O. Has COVID-19 changed crime? Crime rates in the United States during the pandemic. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):537–545. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09551-3. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brantingham PJ, Tita GE, Mohler G. Gang-related crime in Los Angeles remained stable following COVID-19 social distancing orders. Criminology & Public Policy. 2021; 20 (3):423–436. doi: 10.1111/1745-9133.12541. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Byrne J, Rapisarda SS, Hummer D, Kras KR. An imperfect storm: Identifying the root causes of COVID-19 outbreaks in the world’s largest corrections systems. Victims & Offenders. 2020; 15 (7–8):862–909. doi: 10.1080/15564886.2020.1838373. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Buchanan M, Castro ED, Kushner M, Krohn MD. It’s f**ing chaos: COVID-19’s impact on juvenile delinquency and juvenile justice. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):578–600. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09549-x. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Campedelli GM, Aziani A, Favarin S. Exploring the immediate effects of COVID-19 containment policies on crime: An empirical analysis of the short-term aftermath in Los Angeles. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2021; 46 (5):704–727. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09578-6. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Canada, K. E., Huebner, B. M., Garcia-Hallett, J., Givens, A., Inzana, V., Taylor, E., & Peters, C. M. (2022). Community-engaged prison-based research in a pandemic: The efficacy of summative content analysis for understanding prison culture and climate. Journal of Crime and Justice . 10.1080/0735648X.2022.2072364
• Carson EA, Sabol WJ. Aging of the state prison population, 1993–2013 (NCJ 248766) Bureau of Justice Statistics; 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohen LE, Felson M. Social change and crime rate trends: A routine activity approach. American Sociological Review. 1979; 44 (4):588–608. doi: 10.2307/2094589. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cohen, T. H., & Starr, V. L. (2021). Survey of U.S. Probation and Pretrial Services Agencies’ adaptations to COVID-19. Federal Probation , 85 (1), 14–23.
• Collica-Cox K, Molina L. A case study of the Westchester County New York’s jail response to COVID-19: Controlling COVID while balancing service needs for the incarcerated- A national model for jails. Victims & Offenders. 2020; 15 (7–8):1305–1316. doi: 10.1080/15564886.2020.1820923. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Daftary-Kapur T, Henderson KS, Zottoli TM. COVID-19 exacerbates existing system factors that disadvantage defendants: Findings from a national survey of defense attorneys. Law and Human Behavior. 2021; 45 (2):81–96. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000442. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Drake, G., Wheeler, A. P., Kim, D.-Y., Phillips, S. W., & Mendolera, K. (2022). The impact of COVID-19 on the spatial distribution of shooting violence in Buffalo, NY. Journal of Experimental Criminology . 10.1007/s11292-021-09497-4 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Gibbs, C., De Biasi, A., Cobbina-Dungy, J. E., Speers, M., Costantino, M., & Rivers III, L. (2022). COVID-19 and youth violence: Views from the frontline. Journal of Crime and Justice . 10.1080/0735648X.2022.2063156
• Gibson, B. (2020). NCCHC survey yields insights into COVID-19 in U.S. correctional facilities. Journal of Correctional Health Care: The Official Journal of the National Commission on Correctional Health Care , 26 (3), 204–206. [ PubMed ]
• Gover AR, Harper SB, Langton L. Anti-Asian hate crime during the COVID-19 pandemic: Exploring the reproduction of inequality. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):647–667. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09545-1. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gutierrez C, Patterson EJ. Risk and implications of COVID-19 among the community supervised population. Criminology & Public Policy. 2021; 20 (3):437–461. doi: 10.1111/1745-9133.12563. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hartsell, E., & Lane, J. (2022). Initial lessons learned during a remote drug court evaluation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Crime and Justice , 45 (5), 627–645.
• Hodgkinson T, Andresen MA. Show me a man or a woman alone and I’ll show you a saint: Changes in the frequency of criminal incidents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 69 :1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101706. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hughes MH, Prior N. Impacts of incarceration on health focusing on minority males: Considerations for COVID-19 and future pandemics. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. 2021; 37 (4):502–522. doi: 10.1177/10439862211045481. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hummer D. United States Bureau of Prisons’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Victims & Offenders. 2020; 15 (7–8):1262–1276. doi: 10.1080/15564886.2020.1829765. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jaffe E, Sonkin R, Strugo R, Zerath E. Evolution of emergency medical calls during a pandemic – An emergency medical service during the COVID-19 outbreak. The American Journal of Emergency Medicine. 2021; 43 :260–266. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2020.06.039. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jahn JL, Simes JT, Cowger TL, Davis BA. Racial disparities in neighborhood arrest rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Urban Health. 2022; 99 (1):67–76. doi: 10.1007/s11524-021-00598-z. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jennings WG, Perez NM. The immediate impact of COVID-19 on law enforcement in the United States. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):690–701. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09536-2. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kantamneni N. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on marginalized populations in the United States: A research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2020; 119 :1–4. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103439. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaukinen C. When stay-at-home orders leave victims unsafe at home: Exploring the risk and consequences of intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):668–679. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09533-5. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kennedy JP, Rorie M, Benson ML. COVID-19 frauds: An exploratory study of victimization during a global crisis. Criminology & Public Policy. 2021; 20 (3):493–543. doi: 10.1111/1745-9133.12554. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim, D.Y., & McCarty, W. P. (2021). Exploring violent crimes in Chicago during the COVID-19 pandemic: Do location, crime type, and social distancing type matter? Journal of Crime and Justice , 45 (4), 522–537.
• Kim DY, Phillips SW. When COVID-19 and guns meet: A rise in shootings. Journal of Criminal Justice. 2021; 73 :1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2021.101783. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Koppel, S., Capellan, J. A., & Sharp, J. (2022). Disentangling the impact of COVID-19: An interrupted time series analysis of crime in New York city. American Journal of Criminal Justice . 10.1007/s12103-021-09666-1 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Lantz, B., & Wenger, M. R. (2021). Are Asian victims less likely to report hate crime victimization to the police? Implications for research and policy in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Crime & Delinquency , 68 (8), 1292–1319.
• Leal WE, Kurland J, Piquero AR, Gloyd EL, Piquero NL. Where, when, and by whom: An exploratory analysis of COVID-19 public health violations. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. 2021; 37 (4):523–542. doi: 10.1177/10439862211034321. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lemieux AJ, Dumais Michaud AA, Damasse J, Morin-Major JK, Nguyen TN, Lesage A, Crocker AG. Management of COVID-19 for persons with mental illness in secure units: A rapid international review to inform practice in Québec. Victims & Offenders. 2020; 15 (7–8):1337–1360. doi: 10.1080/15564886.2020.1827111. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lopez, E., & Rosenfeld, R. (2021). Crime, quarantine, and the U.S. coronavirus pandemic. Criminology & Public Policy , 20 (3), 401–422. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Lum, C., Maupin, C., & Stoltz, M. (2020a). The impact of COVID-19 on law enforcement agencies (Wave 1). Retrieved June 21, 2022, from https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/IACP-GMU%20Survey.pdf
• Lum, C., Maupin, C., & Stoltz, M. (2020b). The impact of COVID-19 on law enforcement agencies (Wave 2). Retrieved June 21, 2022, from https://www.theiacp.org/sites/default/files/IACP_Covid_Impact_Wave2.pdf
• Marcum CD. American corrections system response to COVID-19: An examination of the procedures and policies used in spring 2020. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):759–768. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09535-3. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mears DP. Out-of-control criminal justice: The systems improvement solution for more safety, justice, accountability, and efficiency. Cambridge University Press; 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mears DP. Creating systems that can improve safety and justice (and why piecemeal change won’t work) Justice Evaluation Journal. 2019; 2 (1):1–17. doi: 10.1080/24751979.2019.1569475. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Miller JM, Blumstein A. Crime, justice & the COVID-19 pandemic: Toward a national research agenda. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 :515–524. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09555-z. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mohler G, Bertozzi AL, Carter J, Short MB, Sledge D, Tita GE, Uchida CD, Brantingham PJ. Impact of social distancing during COVID-19 pandemic on crime in Los Angeles and Indianapolis. Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 68 :1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101692. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moise, I. K., & Piquero, A. R. (2021). Geographic disparities in violent crime during the COVID-19 lockdown in Miami-Dade County, Florida, 2018–2020. Journal of Experimental Criminology . 10.1007/s11292-021-09474-x [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• National Law Enforcement Memorial and Museum. (2021). 2021 end-of-year preliminary law enforcement officers fatalities report. https://nleomf.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2021-EOY-Fatality-Report-Final-web.pdf
• Nix J, Ivanov S, Pickett JT. What does the public want police to do during pandemics? A national experiment. Criminology & Public Policy. 2021; 20 (3):545–571. doi: 10.1111/1745-9133.12535. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Novisky MA, Narvey CS, Semenza DC. Institutional responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in American prisons. Victims & Offenders. 2020; 15 (7–8):1244–1261. doi: 10.1080/15564886.2020.1825582. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Novisky MA, Nowotny KM, Jackson DB, Testa A, Vaughn MG. Incarceration as a fundamental social cause of health inequalities: Jails, prisons and vulnerability to COVID-19. The British Journal of Criminology. 2021; 61 (6):1630–1646. doi: 10.1093/bjc/azab023. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nowotny KM, Seide K, Brinkley-Rubinstein L. Risk of COVID-19 infection among prison staff in the United States. BMC Public Health. 2021; 21 (1):1–8. doi: 10.1186/s12889-021-11077-0. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Payne BK. Criminals work from home during pandemics too: A public health approach to respond to fraud and crimes against those 50 and above. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):563–577. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09532-6. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Piquero AR, Jennings WG, Jemison E, Kaukinen C, Knaul FM. Domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic—Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice. 2021; 74 :1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2021.101806. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Piquero AR, Riddell JR, Bishopp SA, Narvey C, Reid JA, Piquero NL. Staying home, staying safe? A short-term analysis of COVID-19 on Dallas domestic violence. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):601–635. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09531-7. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Powell, K., Hyatt, J. M., & Link, N. W. (2022). Implementing reforms in community corrections: Lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic. Crime & Delinquency , 68 (8), 1223–1246.
• Pyrooz DC, Decker SH, Wolfe SE, Shjarback JA. Was there a Ferguson Effect on crime rates in large U.S. cities? Journal of Criminal Justice. 2016; 46 :1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2016.01.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pyrooz DC, Labrecque RM, Tostlebe JJ, Useem B. Views on COVID-19 from inside prison: Perspectives of high-security prisoners. Justice Evaluation Journal. 2020; 3 (2):294–306. doi: 10.1080/24751979.2020.1777578. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reaves BA. Felony defendants in large urban counties, 2009—Statistical tables (NCJ 243777) Bureau of Justice Statistics; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reid JA, Baglivio MT. COVID-19’s impact on crime and delinquency. Crime & Delinquency. 2022; 68 (8):1127–1136. doi: 10.1177/00111287221084295. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reingle Gonzalez, J. M., Molsberry, R., Maskaly, J., & Jetelina, K. K. (2020). Trends in family violence are not causally associated with COVID-19 stay-at-home orders: A commentary on Piquero et al. American Journal of Criminal Justice , 45 (6), 1100–1110. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Richards TN, Nix J, Mourtgos SM, Adams IT. Comparing 911 and emergency hotline calls for domestic violence in seven cities: What happened when people started staying home due to COVID-19? Criminology & Public Policy. 2021; 20 (3):573–591. doi: 10.1111/1745-9133.12564. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosenfeld, R., Abt, T., & Lopez, E. (2021). Pandemic, social unrest, and crime in U.S. cities: 2020 year-end update. Council on Criminal Justice.
• Rosenfeld, R., Boxerman, B., & Lopez, E. (2022). Pandemic, social unrest, and crime in U.S. cities: Mid-year 2022 update . Council on Criminal Justice.
• Rosenfeld, R., & Lopez, E. (2022). Pandemic, social unrest, and crime in U.S. cities: 2021 year-end update . Council on Criminal Justice.
• Schwalbe CSJ, Koetzle D. What the COVID-19 pandemic teaches about the essential practices of community corrections and supervision. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 2021; 48 (9):1300–1316. doi: 10.1177/00938548211019073. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharma, D., Li, W., Lavoie, D., & Lauer, C. (2020). Prison populations drop by 100,000 during pandemic: But not because of COVID-19 releases . The Marshall Project.
• Shayegh, S., & Malpede, M. (2020). Staying home saves lives, really! (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 3567394). Social Science Research Network. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Stickle B, Felson M. Crime rates in a pandemic: The largest criminological experiment in history. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):525–536. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09546-0. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stogner J, Miller BL, McLean K. Police stress, mental health, and resiliency during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):718–730. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09548-y. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tessler H, Choi M, Kao G. The anxiety of being Asian American: Hate crimes and negative biases during the COVID-19 pandemic. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):636–646. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09541-5. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• The COVID Prison Project. (2022). The COVID Prison Project tracks data and policy across the country to monitor COVID-19 in prisons. Retrieved July 2, 2022, from https://covidprisonproject.com/
• Vest N, Johnson O, Nowotny K, Brinkley-Rubinstein L. Prison population reductions and COVID-19: A latent profile analysis synthesizing recent evidence from the Texas State Prison System. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine. 2021; 98 (1):53–58. doi: 10.1007/s11524-020-00504-z. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Viglione J, Alward LM, Lockwood A, Bryson S. Adaptations to COVID-19 in community corrections agencies across the United States. Victims & Offenders. 2020; 15 (7–8):1277–1297. doi: 10.1080/15564886.2020.1818153. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vose B, Cullen FT, Lee H. Targeted release in the COVID-19 correctional crisis: Using the RNR model to save lives. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):769–779. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09539-z. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vose, B., Miller, J. M., & Koskinen, S. (2020b). Law enforcement manpower analysis: An enhanced calculation model. Policing: An International Journal , 43 (3), 511–523.
• Vuolo, M., Schneider, L. E., & LaPlant, E. G. (2022). Surveillance and the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic for formerly incarcerated individuals. Punishment & Society . 10.1177/14624745221080696
• Wallace D, Walker J, Nelson J, Towers S, Eason J, Grubesic TH. The 2020 coronavirus pandemic and its corresponding data boon: Issues with pandemic-related data from criminal justice organizations. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. 2021; 37 (4):543–568. doi: 10.1177/10439862211027993. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wenger MR, Lantz B, Gallardo G. The role of hate crime victimization, fear of victimization, and vicarious victimization in COVID-19-related depression. Criminal Justice and Behavior. 2022; 49 (12):1746–1762. doi: 10.1177/00938548221104738. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wetzel JE, Davis JM. The response to the COVID-19 crisis by the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. Victims & Offenders. 2020; 15 (7–8):1298–1304. doi: 10.1080/15564886.2020.1830324. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• White MD, Fradella HF. Policing a pandemic: Stay-at-home orders and what they mean for the police. American Journal of Criminal Justice. 2020; 45 (4):702–717. doi: 10.1007/s12103-020-09538-0. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilford MM, Zimmerman DM, Yan S, Sutherland KT. Innocence in the shadow of COVID-19: Plea decision making during a pandemic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied. 2021; 27 (4):739–750. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wolff KT, Intravia J, Baglivio MT, Piquero AR. Violence in the Big Apple throughout the COVID-19 pandemic: A borough-specific analysis. Journal of Criminal Justice. 2022; 81 :1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2022.101929. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Articles on Criminal justice system

Displaying 1 - 20 of 59 articles.

Pierre Poilievre’s proposed mandatory minimum penalties will not reduce crime

Benjamin Perrin , University of British Columbia

Do pre-sentencing reports really help Black offenders in Canada’s justice system?

Camisha Sibblis , University of Windsor

Equitable sentencing can mitigate anti-Black racism in Canada’s justice system

Ardavan Eizadirad , Wilfrid Laurier University and Gregory Leslie , University of Waterloo

We studied jail conditions and jail deaths − here’s what we found

Jessica L. Adler , Florida International University

Traffic tickets can be profitable, and fairness isn’t the bottom line in city courts where judges impose the fines

Sian Mughan , Arizona State University and Akheil Singla , Arizona State University

Daniel Khalife: escapes are just one symptom of a failing prison system

John Podmore , Durham University

A ‘black box’ AI system has been influencing criminal justice decisions for over two decades – it’s time to open it up

Melissa Hamilton , University of Surrey and Pamela Ugwudike , University of Southampton

The ominous inevitability of Suzie Miller’s new play Jailbaby: often, our justice system has nothing to do with justice

Camilla Nelson , University of Notre Dame Australia

Politicians shouldn’t determine where Paul Bernardo is imprisoned, regardless of his crimes

Meg D. Lonergan , Carleton University

‘Too much money is spent on jails and policing’: what Aboriginal communities told us about funding justice reinvestment to keep people out of prison

Fiona Allison , University of Technology Sydney ; Daniel Daylight , Indigenous Knowledge , and Thomas Duncan , Indigenous Knowledge

Race is closely tied to who gets bail — that’s why we must tread carefully on bail reform

Danardo Jones , University of Windsor

Understanding mass incarceration in the US is the first step to reducing a swollen prison population

Jeffrey Bellin , William & Mary Law School

5 ways to reform Canada’s bail system to benefit both the public and the accused

Carolyn Yule , University of Guelph and Laura MacDiarmid , University of Guelph-Humber

Convictions remain rare when police are accused of sexual assault

Danielle McNabb , Queen's University, Ontario and Kate Puddister , University of Guelph

Nigeria has too many prison inmates awaiting trial. Technology could achieve swifter justice

Benjamin Okorie Ajah , University of Nigeria

DNA is often used in solving crimes. But how does DNA profiling actually work?

Adrian Linacre , Flinders University

Incarcerated people with disability don’t get the support they need – that makes them more likely to reoffend

Sophie Yates , UNSW Sydney ; Caroline Doyle , UNSW Sydney , and Shannon Dodd , Australian Catholic University

How Nairobi police failures let people get away with murder

Douglas Lucas Kivoi , The Kenya Institute for Public Policy Research and Analysis (KIPPRA)

Ketanji Brown Jackson sworn in as Supreme Court justice: 4 essential reads

Matt Williams , The Conversation

Ketanji Brown Jackson set for historic Supreme Court confirmation vote: 3 essential reads

Related topics.

• Criminal justice
• Criminal justice reform
• Incarceration
• Mass incarceration
• Sexual assault

Top contributors

Associate Professor of Law, Rutgers University - Newark

Senior Lecturer in Criminology, University of Wollongong

Professor of Political Science, University of Florida

Associate Professor of Law, Santa Clara University

Professor of Law, University of Technology Sydney

Professor, Family & Sexual Violence, RMIT University

Adjunct Associate Professor, University of New England

Professor & Australian Research Council Future Fellow, Social and Global Studies Centre, RMIT University

Professor of Criminal Law, University of Sydney

Associate professor, Monash University

Associate professor in Criminology, The University of Melbourne

Claude Leon Foundation Chair in Constitutional Governance, University of Cape Town

Professor of Forensic Genetics, Flinders University

Professor specialising in public law and less-adversarial justice, The University of Western Australia

Adjunct Associate Professor, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University

• X (Twitter)
• Unfollow topic Follow topic

Explore your training options in 10 minutes Get Started

• Graduate Stories
• Partner Spotlights
• Bootcamp Prep
• Bootcamp Admissions
• University Bootcamps
• Coding Tools
• Software Engineering
• Web Development
• Data Science
• Tech Guides
• Tech Resources
• Career Advice
• Online Learning
• Internships
• Apprenticeships
• Tech Salaries
• Associate Degree
• Bachelor's Degree
• Master's Degree
• University Admissions
• Best Schools
• Certifications
• Bootcamp Financing
• Higher Ed Financing
• Scholarships
• Financial Aid
• Best Coding Bootcamps
• Best Online Bootcamps
• Best Web Design Bootcamps
• Best Data Science Bootcamps
• Best Technology Sales Bootcamps
• Best Data Analytics Bootcamps
• Best Cybersecurity Bootcamps
• Best Digital Marketing Bootcamps
• Los Angeles
• San Francisco
• Browse All Locations
• Digital Marketing
• Machine Learning
• See All Subjects
• Bootcamps 101
• Full-Stack Development
• Career Changes
• View all Career Discussions
• Mobile App Development
• Cybersecurity
• Product Management
• UX/UI Design
• What is a Coding Bootcamp?
• Are Coding Bootcamps Worth It?
• How to Choose a Coding Bootcamp
• Best Online Coding Bootcamps and Courses
• Best Free Bootcamps and Coding Training
• Coding Bootcamp vs. Community College
• Coding Bootcamp vs. Self-Learning
• Bootcamps vs. Certifications: Compared
• What Is a Coding Bootcamp Job Guarantee?
• How to Pay for Coding Bootcamp
• Ultimate Guide to Coding Bootcamp Loans
• Best Coding Bootcamp Scholarships and Grants
• Education Stipends for Coding Bootcamps
• Get Your Coding Bootcamp Sponsored by Your Employer
• GI Bill and Coding Bootcamps
• Tech Intevriews
• Our Enterprise Solution
• Connect With Us
• Publication
• Reskill America
• Partner With Us

• Resource Center
• Bachelor’s Degree
• Master’s Degree

The Top 10 Most Interesting Criminal Justice Research Topics

Are you writing a research paper and having a hard time finding good criminal justice research topics? Thankfully, we have compiled a list of 10 of the best criminal justice research paper topic ideas. We’ve also included several criminal justice research questions and examples of criminal justice research topics to help you write your best paper.

Criminal justice is a great field for both those wanting a greater understanding of the US justice system and those who want to know what it is like to be a lawyer . If you want to write the best criminal justice paper you can, this article is for you.

Find your bootcamp match

What makes a strong criminal justice research topic.

Strong criminal justice research papers consist of a focused question to answer and a specific area of criminal justice like forensic science, serial killers, substance abuse, sexual offenders, cyber criminology, corporate crime, juvenile justice, or criminal behavior. Most educational institutions have guidelines that must be followed for picking criminal justice topics for your criminology research paper, and this list will give you a great place to start researching.

Tips for Choosing a Criminal Justice Research Topic

• Follow the guidelines of your institution. If you are studying criminal justice at any university like Loyola University, Cornell University, Walden University, or even Harvard University, your professor has probably given you guidelines to stick to.
• Keep it focused. When you’re writing a criminal justice research paper it is best to keep a tight focus on your topic. Keep your research focused and remember to stay on task by using study tips, taking breaks, and improving on and practicing your writing skills daily.
• Choose a narrow topic. When choosing your topic the scope of your criminal justice research paper mustn’t be too broad. Ask and answer one question or use one thesis statement that is clear and well-defined.
• Choose a topic that is well-researched. When writing a paper on criminal justice, many topics are too new to have solid research. Pick a topic that has many cases related to it, or is focused on a common issue.
• Choose a topic you are passionate about. There is nothing worse than being stuck writing about a topic you have no interest in. That’s why you should make sure your topic is something that you want to write about. If it ignites your passion, write about it.

What’s the Difference Between a Research Topic and a Research Question?

The difference between a research topic and a research question is that research topics are the broad area of study and research that is used to answer the research question. Research questions are what you are attempting to answer by researching your criminal justice topic.

Criminology topics can encompass areas of study like crime mapping, crime rates, crime prevention, female crimes, experimental criminology, homegrown crimes, or even criminal psychology. Research questions should be very narrow and like do certain criminal justice laws reduce crime? Do criminal justice practitioners engage in critical criminology? Does education in prison reduce reincarnation?

How to Create Strong Criminal Justice Research Questions

When writing a strong criminal justice research question you should ask three questions. Does this question have sufficient research to reference? Is the question narrow and focused? Am I passionate about this topic? If you ask these questions and use our guide to help you get started, you’ll be well on your way to writing a great criminal justice research paper.

Top 10 Criminal Justice Research Paper Topics

1. bad living conditions and access to justice.

In the criminal justice system, sometimes where you live may have an impact on your access to justice. In 2011, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit against the City of Chicago alleging that the Chicago police department had slower response times in areas of the city with poor living conditions. The case was settled in 2021 with a plan to improve.

2. White-Collar Crimes Compared to Working-Class Criminals Punishments

White-collar crimes are generally finance-related crimes such as fraud, embezzlement, or money laundering. According to Cornell University School of Law, white-collar crime costs over $300 billion annually in the US. However, white-collar criminals are prosecuted less severely than their working-class counterparts.

3. False Accusation, False Confessions, and Plea Bargaining

This area of criminal behavior is interesting, as our justice system actually allows for admissions of guilt even if the party did not commit the crime. Sometimes sentences can be reduced if a guilty plea is entered even if the party did not commit the crime.

4. Restorative Justice Efforts on Youthful Offenders

Juvenile and youth offenders have many different rules and avenues for justice. One of these unique approaches to keeping young people from their delinquent behavior employed by problem-solving courts is the concept of restorative justice. Restorative justice is a process that helps offenders make amends with the person or community they hurt with their deviant behaviors.

5. Criminal Justice Reform in Hate Crimes

Hate crimes are crimes that are motivated by hatred of someone or a group of people’s immutable characteristics. In recent years, many states have adopted the federal bias categories as outlined by the Department of Justice. These categories are not adopted by every state, which creates several directions for research questions.

6. Organized Crime and the Social Class Criminal Behavior of Members

Organized crime has been around for centuries, but can be prevalent in communities that see crime as a way of life and family. It can be a robust topic to try and understand the influences that family and community have on organized crime.

7. Criminal Justice Agencies and International Crime Investigation Efforts

One thing that is not often talked about is the relationship between criminal justice agencies that work together across countries. Many agencies work together, and many are made jointly. The most notable agency that does this is Interpol which, in 2021, arrested 1,003 alleged criminals and closed 1,660 cases in just one investigation .

8. Impacts of Wildlife Crime and Environmental Crime

Two little written about criminal justice topics in this scientific field are the topics of environmental and wildlife crime. Pollution, littering, dumping, poaching, and wildfire started by humans are all areas that could be a great place to use your analytical skills and nab a decent grade.

9. Relationship Between Crime and Eyewitness Testimony

Eyewitness testimonies are a staple of modern justice. Many violent crime convictions hinge on the ability of eyewitness testimony to convince a jury of what occurred. Sometimes eyewitness testimony can be unreliable, or the multiple witnesses can testify something different from one another resulting in a wrongful conviction. Many crimes like drunk driving or theft can rest on this method of testimony.

10. Relationship Between Law Enforcement and Racial Profiling

Racial profiling is a topic that has received a lot of coverage and is one of the major criminal justice issues of today. Human rights careers deal with the impact of racial and social issues in the US. There are many areas in which law enforcement has to improve in the area of social science. This is a broad topic with many implications for criminal justice ethics and the area of distributive justice.

Other Examples of Criminal Justice Research Topics & Questions

Criminal justice research topics.

• Jury nullification
• Online predators
• Drunk drivers
• Gun control
• Campus crime

Criminal Justice Research Questions

• Does restorative justice reduce incarceration rates in juveniles?
• Do drug courts engage with racial profiling in the criminal justice system?
• Are environmental crimes underreported in the criminal justice field?
• Can organized criminal behavior be reduced by new crime control measures?
• Does mental illness cause more false confessions?

Choosing the Right Criminal Justice Research Topic

If you take these criminal justice research topic ideas and start researching, you’ll find a topic that strikes your creativity and deals with current justice issues. If college courses seem like they may not be for you, you can always use your knowledge to get a job in criminal justice without a degree .

As we stated earlier, two important parts to finding a great topic for criminology studies or criminal justice is to follow your institution’s guidelines and find a topic that you’re passionate about. Difficult topics like child abuse, victim services, jury selection, sexual violence, or any other of the wide range of topics are important and you can do them real justice and care in your paper.

Criminal Justice Research Topics FAQ

A good criminal research topic should be a broad area with lots of research and case studies behind it. It follows your institutional guidelines and that you are passionate about.

Controversial topics in criminal justice include issues that the court is not settled on or ones that disrupt long-standing positions in the courts. Issues like private prisons, gun control, reproductive rights, and criminal court reform could all be considered controversial.

Feminist criminology started in the late 60s and early 70s to bring attention to both female criminals and victims. The movement started because of the male-focused approach to criminal psychology with little to no regard for how a woman may be psychologically different.

Current issues in the criminal justice system include topics like racial justice, social justice, police reform, reproductive rights, and LGBTQ+ discrimination. Many of these topics are being discussed in both state and federal courts.

About us: Career Karma is a platform designed to help job seekers find, research, and connect with job training programs to advance their careers. Learn about the CK publication .

What's Next?

Get matched with top bootcamps

Ask a question to our community, take our careers quiz.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Exploring Criminal Justice Research Topics: The State of Justice

Are you searching for the best criminal justice research topics? If yes, then have a close look at some of the best criminal justice research topics in 2023.

The criminal justice system is a complex system that is designed to maintain public safety and uphold the rule of law. Criminal justice research plays a critical role in advancing our understanding of the system, identifying areas for improvement, and developing evidence-based policies and practices. Research in criminal justice is particularly important given the significant impact that the system has on individuals, communities, and society as a whole.

There are several main areas of research within criminal justice that are of great importance. These include law enforcement, corrections, juvenile justice, victimology, criminology, and emerging criminal justice issues. Each of these areas has its own unique challenges and opportunities for research, and each plays a critical role in ensuring the effective and fair operation of the criminal justice system.

Criminal Justice Research Topics

Table of Contents

Have a close look at criminal justice research topics.

Law enforcement topics

These are the best criminal justice research topics.

Police training and education

• The impact of police training on officer behavior and performance
• Best practices for police training and education
• The effectiveness of different training models (e.g., scenario-based training, community-oriented policing training)
• Ongoing education and training for police officers

Use of technology in investigations

• The use of forensic technology (e.g., DNA analysis, fingerprint analysis) in criminal investigations
• The effectiveness of different technological tools (e.g., crime mapping, data analysis) in solving and preventing crime
• Ethical and legal considerations related to the use of technology in investigations

Police culture and organizational behavior

• The impact of police culture on officer behavior and decision-making
• Factors that contribute to police misconduct and corruption
• Best practices for promoting ethical behavior and accountability within law enforcement organizations
• The relationship between police culture and community trust

Crisis intervention and mental health response

• The role of police in responding to mental health crises
• Best practices for crisis intervention training for police officers
• The effectiveness of mental health response teams and alternative response models
• The impact of mental health crises on police-community relations

Use of community-based partnerships

• The effectiveness of community-based partnerships in reducing crime
• Best practices for building and sustaining partnerships between law enforcement and community organizations
• The impact of community-based partnerships on police-community relations
• The role of community-based partnerships in promoting crime prevention and community safety.

Use of predictive policing

• Definition and principles of predictive policing
• The effectiveness of predictive policing in reducing crime
• Ethical and legal considerations related to the use of predictive policing
• Best practices for implementing predictive policing to reduce the potential for bias and discrimination

Police officer wellness

• The impact of police work on officer mental health and well-being
• Best practices for promoting officer wellness and reducing burnout
• The relationship between officer wellness and performance
• Strategies to improve police officer retention and reduce turnover

Police-community relations in immigrant communities

• The impact of immigration policies and enforcement on police-community relations
• Best practices for engaging with immigrant communities and promoting trust and cooperation
• The role of language access in effective communication with immigrant communities
• The impact of cultural competency training for police officers working with immigrant communities

Police use of social media

• The role of social media in police investigations and community engagement
• Best practices for social media use by law enforcement agencies
• Ethical and legal considerations related to police use of social media
• The impact of social media on police-community relations

Domestic violence and law enforcement response

• The effectiveness of law enforcement response to domestic violence
• Best practices for responding to domestic violence incidents
• The impact of domestic violence on police officers
• Strategies to improve the coordination of law enforcement and community resources for domestic violence survivors.

Corrections research topics

Effectiveness of rehabilitation programs.

• Different types of rehabilitation programs available for offenders
• Evidence-based practices for rehabilitation programs
• Factors that contribute to successful rehabilitation
• Evaluation of the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs in reducing recidivism

Prison overcrowding

• Causes and consequences of prison overcrowding
• Strategies to reduce prison overcrowding
• The impact of overcrowding on inmate behavior and well-being
• Alternatives to incarceration as a means of addressing prison overcrowding
• Definition and measurement of recidivism
• Factors that contribute to recidivism
• Evaluation of interventions designed to reduce recidivism
• The relationship between recidivism and community safety

Alternatives to incarceration

• Different types of alternatives to incarceration available for offenders
• The effectiveness of alternatives to incarceration in reducing recidivism
• Best practices for implementing alternatives to incarceration
• The impact of alternatives to incarceration on the criminal justice system

Substance abuse treatment in corrections

• Prevalence of substance abuse among incarcerated individuals
• Evidence-based substance abuse treatment programs
• The effectiveness of substance abuse treatment in reducing recidivism
• Challenges to providing substance abuse treatment in correctional facilities

Mental health treatment in corrections

• Prevalence of mental health issues among incarcerated individuals
• Evidence-based mental health treatment programs
• The effectiveness of mental health treatment in reducing recidivism
• Challenges to providing mental health treatment in correctional facilities

Re-entry and reintegration

• The challenges faced by individuals re-entering society after incarceration
• Best practices for supporting successful re-entry and reintegration
• The impact of successful re-entry on recidivism and community safety
• The role of community resources in supporting re-entry and reintegration.

Juvenile research topics

Effectiveness of diversion programs.

• Definition and principles of diversion programs
• Different types of diversion programs available for juveniles
• Evidence-based practices for diversion programs
• Evaluation of the effectiveness of diversion programs in reducing recidivism

Juvenile delinquency prevention

• Risk factors for juvenile delinquency
• Evidence-based prevention programs
• The effectiveness of prevention programs in reducing juvenile delinquency
• Best practices for implementing prevention programs

Juvenile recidivism

• Definition and measurement of juvenile recidivism
• Factors that contribute to juvenile recidivism
• Evaluation of interventions designed to reduce juvenile recidivism
• The relationship between juvenile recidivism and community safety

Racial disparities in the juvenile justice system

• Prevalence and impact of racial disparities in the juvenile justice system
• Factors contributing to racial disparities in the system
• Strategies to address racial disparities in the juvenile justice system
• The impact of addressing racial disparities on juvenile outcomes and community safety

Juvenile mental health and substance abuse treatment

• Prevalence of mental health and substance abuse issues among juvenile offenders
• Evidence-based treatment programs
• The effectiveness of mental health and substance abuse treatment in reducing recidivism
• Challenges to providing mental health and substance abuse treatment in the juvenile justice system

Juvenile justice system response to LGBTQ+ youth

• Challenges faced by LGBTQ+ youth in the juvenile justice system
• Best practices for responding to the unique needs of LGBTQ+ youth in the system
• The impact of addressing the needs of LGBTQ+ youth on juvenile outcomes and community safety
• Legal and ethical considerations related to the treatment of LGBTQ+ youth in the system.

Victimology research topics

Victim services.

• Types of victim services available
• Evidence-based practices for victim services
• Evaluation of the effectiveness of victim services in meeting the needs of victims
• Best practices for delivering victim services

Victim impact statements

• Definition and purpose of victim impact statements
• Legal and ethical considerations related to victim impact statements
• The impact of victim impact statements on sentencing and judicial decision-making
• The role of victim impact statements in promoting victim empowerment

Restorative justice

• Definition and principles of restorative justice
• Different types of restorative justice programs available
• Evidence-based practices for restorative justice
• Evaluation of the effectiveness of restorative justice in reducing recidivism and promoting victim satisfaction

Domestic violence

• Prevalence and impact of domestic violence on victims
• Factors that contribute to domestic violence
• Evidence-based interventions for domestic violence offenders
• Best practices for supporting victims of domestic violence

Child victimization

• Prevalence and impact of child victimization
• Different types of child victimization
• Evidence-based interventions for child victims
• Best practices for supporting child victims of violence

Sexual violence

• Prevalence and impact of sexual violence on victims
• Factors that contribute to sexual violence
• Evidence-based interventions for sexual violence offenders
• Best practices for supporting victims of sexual violence

Hate crimes

Definition and prevalence of hate crimes.

• Definition of hate crimes and different types of hate crimes
• The prevalence of hate crimes in the United States and globally
• The impact of hate crimes on individuals, communities, and society

Impact of hate crimes on victims and communities

• Psychological and emotional impact on victims of hate crimes
• The impact of hate crimes on communities and social cohesion
• The role of hate crimes in perpetuating inequality and discrimination

Strategies for preventing and responding to hate crimes

• Legislative and policy responses to hate crimes
• Law enforcement strategies for preventing and responding to hate crimes
• Community-based approaches for preventing and addressing hate crimes
• Educational and awareness-raising initiatives to prevent hate crimes

The role of victim services in supporting victims of hate crimes

• Types of victim services available for hate crime victims
• Best practices for delivering victim services for hate crime victims
• The impact of hate crimes on victims’ access to justice and services
• The role of victim services in promoting victim empowerment and recovery

International perspectives on hate crimes

• International legal frameworks for addressing hate crimes
• Differences and similarities in the prevalence and response to hate crimes globally
• Lessons learned from international efforts to prevent and respond to hate crimes.

Perpetrators of hate crimes

• The profile of hate crime offenders
• Motivations and ideologies of hate crime offenders
• Prevention and intervention strategies for individuals at risk of committing hate crimes

Intersectionality and hate crimes

• The impact of multiple identities (e.g. race, gender, sexuality) on hate crimes
• The unique experiences of individuals who experience hate crimes due to multiple identities
• The importance of an intersectional approach in addressing hate crimes

Social media and hate crimes

• The role of social media in the dissemination of hate speech and hate crimes
• Strategies for addressing hate speech and hate crimes on social media platforms
• The impact of social media on hate crime perpetration and victimization

Hate crimes against specific communities

• Anti-Semitic hate crimes
• Islamophobic hate crimes
• Hate crimes against the LGBTQ+ community
• Hate crimes against individuals with disabilities
• Hate crimes against immigrants and refugees

Restorative justice and hate crimes

• The use of restorative justice in addressing hate crimes
• Challenges and benefits of using restorative justice in hate crime cases
• Examples of restorative justice programs for hate crimes.

Criminology topics

Theories of crime.

• Classical, positivist, and critical criminological theories
• Biological, psychological, and sociological explanations of crime
• Contemporary criminological theories, including feminist, cultural, and peacemaking theories

The relationship between poverty and crime

• Theories linking poverty and crime
• Empirical evidence of the relationship between poverty and crime
• Alternative explanations for the relationship between poverty and crime

White-collar crime

• Definition and types of white-collar crime
• The prevalence and impact of white-collar crime
• Regulatory and law enforcement responses to white-collar crime

Organized crime

• Definition and types of organized crime
• The impact of organized crime on society
• Law enforcement strategies for combating organized crime

Gender and crime

• Gender differences in crime rates and offending patterns
• The impact of gender on experiences of victimization
• The intersection of gender with race, class, and sexuality in criminological research

Criminal justice policy and practice

• The impact of policy and practice on the criminal justice system
• Evidence-based approaches to criminal justice policy and practice
• The role of advocacy and social movements in shaping criminal justice policy

Environmental criminology

• The relationship between crime and the physical and social environment
• Theories and empirical research on environmental criminology
• Implications for crime prevention and control

Comparative and international criminology

• Differences and similarities in crime rates and patterns across countries
• Cross-national studies of criminal justice systems and policies
• The impact of globalization on crime and criminal justice.

Emerging criminal justice research topics

Have a close look at emerging criminal justice research topics.

• Definition and types of cybercrime
• The impact of cybercrime on individuals, businesses, and society
• Strategies for preventing and responding to cybercrime

Human trafficking

• Definition and types of human trafficking
• The prevalence and impact of human trafficking
• Efforts to combat human trafficking at the local, national, and international levels

Environmental crime

• Definition and types of environmental crime
• The impact of environmental crime on the environment and public health
• The role of regulation and law enforcement in preventing and addressing environmental crime
• Definitions and typologies of terrorism
• The impact of terrorism on society and international relations
• Counterterrorism strategies and their effectiveness

Technology and criminal justice

• Emerging technologies and their impact on the criminal justice system
• Ethical and legal considerations in the use of technology in criminal justice
• The future of technology in criminal justice

Mass incarceration and criminal justice reform

• The causes and consequences of mass incarceration
• Strategies for reducing incarceration rates and improving the criminal justice system
• The role of community-based alternatives to incarceration

Police-community relations

• Building trust between law enforcement and communities
• The impact of community engagement on policing outcomes
• The role of community-based organizations in promoting positive police-community relations

Mental health and criminal justice

• The prevalence of mental illness among incarcerated individuals
• The impact of incarceration on mental health
• Strategies for providing mental health services to justice-involved individuals

Intersectionality and criminal justice

• The impact of multiple identities (e.g. race, gender, sexuality) on criminal justice outcomes
• The unique experiences of individuals who experience intersecting forms of oppression in the criminal justice system
• The importance of an intersectional approach in criminal justice research and policy.

These are the best criminal justice research topics. In conclusion, criminal justice research is a vital field that encompasses a wide range of topics related to crime and the criminal justice system. This outline has explored several key areas of research within criminal justice, including law enforcement, corrections, juvenile justice, victimology, hate crimes, criminology, and emerging issues such as cybercrime and human trafficking.

While much progress has been made in understanding and addressing these issues, there is still much work to be done. Further research and policy development are needed to improve the effectiveness and fairness of the criminal justice system and to better serve the needs of victims, offenders, and communities.

Therefore, it is crucial that policymakers, practitioners, and researchers continue to collaborate to advance the field of criminal justice and promote evidence-based practices that ensure justice, safety, and fairness for all. If you want to suggest us any other criminal justice research topics then comment down below.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is criminal justice research.

Criminal justice research is the systematic study of crime and the criminal justice system. It involves collecting and analyzing data to understand the nature and causes of crime, as well as the effectiveness of policies and practices aimed at preventing and responding to crime.

Why is criminal justice research important?

Criminal justice research is important because it provides insights into the complex nature of crime and the criminal justice system. It can help policymakers, practitioners, and communities make informed decisions about how to prevent and respond to crime and promote public safety.

Who conducts criminal justice research?

Criminal justice research is conducted by a range of professionals, including academic researchers, government agencies, non-profit organizations, and private consulting firms.

What are some common research methods used in criminal justice research?

Common research methods used in criminal justice research include surveys, interviews, focus groups, experiments, observations, and secondary data analysis.

How is criminal justice research used in policymaking?

Criminal justice research can be used to inform the development of policies and practices aimed at preventing and responding to crime. Policymakers may use research findings to make informed decisions about funding priorities, program design, and implementation strategies.

What are some emerging areas of criminal justice research?

Some emerging areas of criminal justice research include cybercrime, human trafficking, environmental crime, terrorism, technology and criminal justice, mass incarceration and criminal justice reform, police-community relations, mental health and criminal justice, and intersectionality and criminal justice.

Similar Articles

Top 19 Tips & Tricks On How To Improve Grades?

Do you want to improve your grades? If yes, then don’t worry! In this blog, I have provided 19 tips…

How To Study For Final Exam – 12 Proven Tips You Must Know

How To Study For Final Exam? Studying for the final exam is very important for academic success because they test…

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Criminal Justice

IResearchNet

Academic Writing Services

Criminal justice research topics.

This collection provides overviews of   nearly 100 key criminal justice research topics comprising traditional criminology and its more modern interdisciplinary outgrowths. These topics are divided into six thematic parts:

• Criminology
• Correlates of Crime
• Criminology Theories
• Crime Research
• Types of Crime
• Criminal Justice System

Criminology and Criminal Justice Research Topics

Research topics in criminology:.

• Criminology as Social Science .
• Criminology and Public Policy .
• History of Criminology .

Research Topics in Crime and Victimization:

• Age and Crime .
• Aggression and Crime .
• Citizenship and Crime .
• Education and Crime .
• Employment and Crime .
• Families and Crime .
• Gender and Crime .
• Guns and Crime .
• Immigration and Crime .
• Intelligence and Crime .
• Mental Illness and Crime .
• Neighborhoods and Crime .
• Peers and Crime .
• Race and Crime .
• Religion and Crime .
• Social Class and Crime .
• Victimization .
• Weather and Crime .

Research Topics in Criminology Theories:

• Biological Theori es.
• Classical Criminology .
• Convict Criminology .
• Criminal Justice Theories .
• Critical Criminology .
• Cultural Criminology .
• Cultural Transmission Theory .
• Deterrence and Rational Choice Theory .
• Feminist Criminology .
• Labeling and Symbolic Interaction Theories .
• Life Course Criminology .
• Psychological Theories of Crime .
• Routine Activities Theory .
• Self-Control Theory .
• Social Construction of Crime .
• Social Control Theory .
• Social Disorganization Theory .
• Social Learning Theory .
• Strain Theories .
• Theoretical Integration.

Research Topics in Criminology Research and Measurement:

• Citation and Content Analysis .
• Crime Classification Systems .
• Crime Mapping .
• Crime Reports and Statistics .
• Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) and Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) .
• Edge Ethnography .
• Experimental Criminology .
• Fieldwork in Criminology .
• Program Evaluation .
• Quantitative Criminology .

Research Topics in Types of Crime:

• Campus Crime .
• Child Abuse .
• Cybercrime .
• Domestic Violence .
• Elder Abuse .
• Environmental Crime .
• Hate Crime .
• Human Trafficking .
• Identity Theft .
• Juvenile Delinquency .
• Organizational Crime .
• Prostitution .
• Sex Offenses .
• Terrorism .
• Theft and Shoplifting .
• White-Collar Crime .
• Wildlife Crime .

Research Topics in Criminal Justice System:

• Capital Punishment .
• Community Corrections .
• Crime Prevention .
• Criminal Courts .
• Criminal Justice Ethics .
• Criminal Law .
• Criminal Specialization .
• Drug Courts .
• Drugs and the Criminal Justice System .
• Felon Disenfranchisement .
• Forensic Science .
• Juvenile Court .
• Juvenile Justice .
• Mass Media, Crime, and Justice .
• Offender Classification .
• Offender Reentry .
• Police–Community Relations .
• Prison System .
• Problem-Solving Courts .
• Public Health and Criminal Justice .
• Racial Profiling .
• Restorative Justice .
• Sentencing .
• The Police .
• Victim Services .
• Wrongful Convictions .
• Youth Gangs .

Because just listing suggestions for criminal justice research topics will be of limited value we have included short topical overviews and suggestions for narrowing those topics and divided them into 6 parts as in the list above. If you’re interested in some topic in the list follow the links below for more information.

Example   criminal justice research papers   on these topics have been designed to serve as sources of model papers for most criminological topics. These research papers were written by several well-known discipline figures and emerging younger scholars who provide authoritative overviews coupled with insightful discussion that will quickly familiarize researchers and students alike with fundamental and detailed information for each criminal justice topic.

This collection begins by defining the discipline of criminology and observing its historical development (Part I: Criminology ). The various social (e.g., poverty, neighborhood, and peer/family influences), personal (e.g., intelligence, mental illness), and demographic (e.g., age, race, gender, and immigration) realities that cause, confound, and mitigate crime and crime control are featured in   Part II: Correlates of Crime . The research papers in this section consider each correlate’s impact, both independently and in a broader social ecological context. The sociological origins of theoretical criminology are observed across several research papers that stress classical, environmental, and cultural influences on crime and highlight peer group, social support, and learning processes. Examination of these criminological theory research papers quickly confirms the aforementioned interdisciplinary nature of the field, with research papers presenting biological, psychological, and biosocial explanations and solutions for crime (Part III: Criminology Theories ).

Part IV: Criminology Research provides example research papers on various quantitative and qualitative designs and techniques employed in criminology research. Comparison of the purposes and application of these research methods across various criminal justice topics illustrates the role of criminologists as social scientists engaged in research enterprises wherein single studies fluctuate in focus along a pure–applied research continuum. This section also addresses the measurement of crimes with attention to major crime reporting and recording systems.

Having established a theoretical–methodological symmetry as the scientific foundation of criminology, and increasingly the field of criminal justice,   Part V: Types of Crime   considers a wide range of criminal offenses. Each research paper in this section thoroughly defines its focal offense and considers the related theories that frame practices and policies used to address various leading violent, property, and morality crimes. These research papers also present and critically evaluate the varying level of empirical evidence, that is, research confirmation, for competing theoretical explanations and criminal justice system response alternatives that are conventionally identified as best practices.

Ostensibly, an accurate and thorough social science knowledge base stands to render social betterment in terms of reduced crime and victimization through the development of research–based practices. This science–practitioner relationship is featured, advocated, and critiqued in the research papers of the final section,   Part VI: Criminal Justice System . Here, the central components of criminal justice research paper topics (law enforcement, courts, and corrections) are presented from a criminology–criminal justice outlook that increasingly purports to leverage theory and research (in particular, program evaluation results) toward realizing criminal justice and related social policy objectives. Beyond the main system, several research papers consider the role and effectiveness of several popular justice system and wrap-around component initiatives (e.g., specialty courts, restorative justice, and victim services).

See also: Domestic Violence Research Topics and School Violence Research Topics .

A better path forward for criminal justice: Reimagining pretrial and sentencing

• Download a PDF of this chapter.

Subscribe to Governance Weekly

Pamela k. lattimore , pamela k. lattimore senior director for research development, division for applied justice research - rti international cassia spohn , and cassia spohn regents professor - school of criminology and criminal justice, arizona state university matthew demichele matthew demichele senior research sociologist - rti international.

• 28 min read

Below is the second chapter from “A Better Path Forward for Criminal Justice,” a report by the Brookings-AEI Working Group on Criminal Justice Reform. You can access other chapters from the report here .

The roots of mass incarceration in the United States lie in policies and practices that result in jail for millions of individuals charged with but not convicted of any crime and lengthy jail or prison sentences for those who are convicted. These policies and practices are the results of 50 years of efforts at criminal justice reform in response to the “War on Crime” and the “War on Drugs” that began in the 1970s—intended to improve public safety, curb drug abuse, and address perceived inequities in the justice system, these reforms also had unintended consequences that exacerbated disparities.

As the United States grapples with yet another iteration of calls for social and racial justice following multiple deaths of Black Americans at the hands of law enforcement, the time is ripe to develop and implement deep structural reforms that will increase fairness and ensure proportionate punishment without sacrificing public safety. Concurrently, practices implemented to address the public health crisis in the Nation’s jails and prisons accompanying the COVID-19 pandemic provide an opportunity to examine whether reducing pretrial detention and prison sentences can be accomplished without negatively affecting public safety.

As the United States grapples with yet another iteration of calls for social and racial justice following multiple deaths of Black Americans at the hands of law enforcement, the time is ripe to develop and implement deep structural reforms that will increase fairness and ensure proportionate punishment without sacrificing public safety.

This chapter briefly discusses the evolution of criminal justice reform efforts focused on pretrial and sentencing policies and practices that resulted in unprecedented rates of incarceration that have only recently begun to abate. This discussion is followed by proposals for policy reforms that should be implemented and recommendations for critical research needed to guide future reform efforts.

Level Setting

Despite declining somewhat over the past two decades, America’s incarceration rate remains the highest in the world. 1  Individuals in the United States may spend months in jail awaiting trial and those convicted are more likely than those in peer nations to receive long carceral sentences. Against the backdrop of renewed calls for racial and social justice in response to deaths of Black people at the hands of police, the COVID-19 pandemic has shone an unforgiving spotlight on America’s jails and prisons, where those awaiting trial or serving sentences have experienced disproportionate rates of infection and death due to the spread of the virus. The responses to the pandemic in many jurisdictions have included unprecedented efforts to reduce jail populations and some efforts toward early prison release that provide an opportunity to determine whether reducing pretrial detention or prison sentences can be accomplished without negatively affecting public safety.

The United States has been engaged in efforts to reform pretrial practices and sentencing for more than five decades. The 1966 Bail Reform Act sought to reduce pretrial detention through the offer of payment of money bond in lieu of detention, while rising violent crime rates and an ongoing “drug war” resulted in the 1984 Pretrial Reform Act that once again led to a reliance on preventive pretrial detention. More recently, there has been a renewed push to reduce reliance on financial requirements for pretrial release in response to concerns about the growing numbers of individuals detained and the disparate impact of these detentions on individuals who are poor and people of color. Risk assessment tools that predict failure to appear and new arrests for those released while awaiting trial have been implemented to support release decisionmaking and to provide an alternative to money bail. These tools have also been suggested as a means to reduce disparities in release that may reflect implicit biases and cognitive errors in judgement by those charged with making release decisions quickly with incomplete information. Risk assessment tools continue to garner support despite criticisms that they perpetuate historical biases that exist in the criminal record information used to make the predictions.

Concerns about disparity, discrimination, and unfairness in sentencing led to a sentencing reform movement that began in the mid-1970s and that, over time, revolutionized sentencing. States and the federal system moved from indeterminate sentencing, in which judges imposed minimum and maximum sentences and parole boards determined how long those incarcerated would serve, to structured sentencing policies that constrained the discretion of judges, ensured that sentences were pegged to crime seriousness and to the criminal history of those found guilty, and, in many jurisdictions, eliminated discretionary release on parole.

As the “War on Crime” and the “War on Drugs” escalated during the 1980s in response to increasing rates of violent crime and the drug—primarily crack cocaine—epidemic, reformers also championed changes designed to establish more punitive sentencing standards. These changes included sentencing enhancements for use of a weapon, prior criminal history, and infliction of serious injury; mandatory minimum sentences, particularly for drug and weapons offenses; “three-strikes laws” that mandated long prison sentences for repeat offenders; truth-in-sentencing statutes that required individuals to serve more of their sentences before they were eligible for release; and life without the possibility of parole (LWOP) sentences. Federal support for these efforts included funding under the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (Pub. L. 103-322) that established the Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-in-Sentencing (VOI/TIS) Incentive Grant Program, which was designed to assist state efforts to remove violent offenders from the community. Over five years (FY1996 to FY2001) this program provided states with $3 billion in funding to expand prison and jail capacity and to encourage states to eliminate indeterminate sentencing in favor of “Truth in Sentencing” laws that required individuals to serve at least 85 percent of the imposed sentence. 2

What have been the results of these efforts at reform? More individuals detained pretrial as the numbers of individuals booked into jails increased and as the proportion of those held in jail pending trial increased from 56 percent of the jail population in 2000 to 66 percent in 2018. Prison populations also skyrocketed—from about 200,000 in 1970 to 1.43 million in 2019. 3 Further, sentences became more punitive, with individuals convicted of felonies in state and federal courts facing a greater likelihood of incarceration and longer sentences than they did in the pre-reform era. The number of individuals serving life—and life without the possibility of parole—sentences also increased dramatically; there are now more offenders serving life sentences than the total number of individual who were held in all U.S prisons in the early 1970s. Worldwide, the United States accounts for more than one-third of all life sentences and eight out of ten LWOP sentences. Moreover, there is persuasive evidence that these punitive changes did not produce the predicted decline in crime but did exacerbate already alarming racial and ethnic disparities in incarceration.

T here are now more offenders serving life sentences than the total number of individual s  who were held in all U.S prisons in the early 1970s.

Pretrial detention and prison incarceration are linked, as those engaged in recent efforts on pretrial reform recognize. Pretrial detention contributes to mass incarceration both directly and indirectly. Pretrial detention results in a greater likelihood that individuals (irrespective of guilt) will plead guilty, a greater likelihood of being sentenced to incarceration, and longer sentences. These impacts are disproportionately borne by people of color—who are more likely to be detained and less likely to be able to afford bond amounts that are often set higher than for similarly situated White defendants.

The consequences of pretrial detention are difficult to reconcile given that many of those detained pretrial are charged with offenses that, were they to be found guilty, would be unlikely to result in incarcerative sentences. Research suggests that pretrial detention is linked to substantially higher recidivism rates post sentencing—suggesting that even if pretrial detention reduces some criminal activity during the pretrial period this is more than offset by much higher recidivism rates after individuals serve their sentences. Further, pretrial detention removes individuals presumed innocent from their families and communities—often resulting in the loss of employment and housing, interrupted treatment, and, in some cases, the loss of child custody. Court imposed fines and fees are passed without making income-based adjustments and failure to pay such fines and fees can result in revocation of one’s driver’s license and further incarceration.

Housing America’s prisoners is expensive—more than $88 billion in local, state, and federal taxpayer monies were spent on corrections in 2016. 4 Most of those in jail are awaiting trial—so the costs of jail are not to pay for punishment. Instead, pretrial detention is meant to ensure attendance at trial and to protect the public from harm by individuals who have not been convicted of a crime. But, in fact, failure to appear at trial is rare and often due to mundane reasons (e.g., forgetting the trial or hearing date). Similarly, new arrests of those released pretrial are also infrequent with arrests for violent crimes rare. 5

The costs of jail or prison for sentenced individuals are justified in terms of one or more of the purposes of punishment—retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, and rehabilitation. The first of these (retribution) provides voice to the victims of crime and recognizes society’s need for justice. The remaining three are utilitarian justifications of punishment, each of which is designed to prevent or reduce crime. Incarcerated individuals cannot perpetrate new crimes on society at large (incapacitation) and there is a presumption that punishment will deter those who have been punished and those contemplating similar crimes from future criminal acts (deterrence). Finally, as reflected in the last three decades’ focus on reentry programs, society benefits if prisoners can be rehabilitated, reentering society with the skills and desire to be contributing citizens. These goals are often at odds—lengthy prison sentences may be justified by the seriousness of the crime and may act to incapacitate dangerous individuals or to deter potential offenders, but they also may decrease the odds of rehabilitation and successful reentry into the community. Long prison sentences that cause individuals to lose touch with their families and their communities and that reduce their ability to function in society interfere with rehabiliative goals, particularly as the prison environment itself is toxic to individual agency and the skills needed to function in society.

There is an urgent need to identify a balanced strategy with respect to pretrial justice and sentencing, one that will reduce crime and victimization, ameliorate unwarranted disparities, and reclaim human capital currently lost to incarceration. This strategy should identify the costs incurred across the system and society and ensure that these costs are balanced by the benefits. Further, to ensure that the intent of policy changes is realized and to identify unanticipated consequences, rigorous research should assess the impacts and costs of changes, identifying what is promising.

Criminal justice reform is complicated. In the United States, justice responsibilities are spread across the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of local, state, and federal governments. As a result, the costs and benefits of various justice functions are seldom obvious to those making decisions. Further, the costs often accrue to one branch and level of government while the benefits accrue to another—for example, if the local government implements and pays for a program that diverts individuals with mental illness from jail to treatment, thus reducing future criminal activity, the local police and jail may incur fewer future justice system costs but the greatest savings may accrue to the state government that won’t have to prosecute and incarcerate or supervise these individuals in the future. A judicial decision to detain an individual pretrial or to sentence an individual to years in prison (or on probation) imposes costs that are not borne by the judicial branch. As a result, there is often little incentive to change policies and practices. In addition, laws and decisions are often made to address retributive or incapacitation goals—perhaps with a nod to deterrence—without consideration that less punitive—and less costly—interventions might provide better, long-term societal outcomes. Finally, the justice system is often the system of last resort to address the needs of individuals with mental illness and substance use disorders, who often do not have the education and job skills to be successful in the 21 st century. Rethinking how society can better address societal disadvantage may relieve the burdens on the justice system and result in better outcomes.

Our recommendations for achieving these goals include the following:

Short-Term Reforms

• Cost-benefit Analyses of Pretrial and Sentencing Practices
• Set Fines and Fees on Ability to Pay

Hold Prosecutors Accountable for Filing and Plea-Bargaining Decisions

• Reconsider Probation and Parole Practices that Contribute to Mass Incarceration

Medium-Term Reform

Inter-Agency Approaches to Reducing Justice System Intervention

Long-Term Reforms

Establish a Presumption of Pretrial Release

Revise sentencing statutes to ensure proportionality, short-term reforms, cost-benefit analyses of pretrial and sentencing practices.

Immediate changes could be made to reveal the costs across decision points within justice systems to those making decisions, with a goal of ensuring that the incurred costs are equal to the benefits. For pretrial decisions, this means stakeholders would have the information to understand that pretrial detention is not “free,” but instead comes with justice system costs and with collateral costs to the detained, their families, and their communities. If the average cost of a night in jail is $50 or higher 6  and given the collateral costs of pretrial detention, how many nights in jail awaiting trial would be justifiable for someone who is charged with a minor crime that would never result in a sentence of incarceration? Does society benefit if an individual spends many nights in jail because they are unable to post $200 to cover a $2000 bond while they are awaiting trial on minor charges or because they were unable to pay fees and fines from a previous case?

Justice systems should consider monetary and extra-monetary costs alongside the usual considerations of judicial officers as to whether someone will miss court or be arrested for a new crime as well as the costs of these very different events. Missing court is likely less costly than incorrectly detaining many people to avoid the potential for missed court appearances—particularly if inexpensive court reminder systems can more cheaply reduce failures to appear. Many jails reduced their pretrial detained populations significantly as the COVID-19 pandemic began and there is little evidence of effects on crime. This may provide a reset in some communities as they consider that what changed was not the risk posed by the detained individuals but the decision to release, as well as reconsideration of the initial decisions to arrest (rather than cite) and book into jail. To this end, jurisdictions need to move away from reliance on financial conditions for release. Few people are denied bail, but most people detained pretrial are there because they are unable to pay bail—a system that advantages the well-off who have the resources to cover bail at the expense of the poor. If bail cannot be eliminated for most charges, policymakers should revisit the use of private bail bond agencies so that individuals who are released only by securing the services of a bail agency do not end up forgoing the ten percent they pay to cover their bail—an expense they incur even if they appear and meet all pretrial conditions.

Setting Fines and Fees Based on Ability to Pay

Another reform that could be accomplished in the short-term is setting fines and fees based on ability to pay. 7 Just as bail differentially disadvantages the poor over the more well-off individual, so do fixed fine and fee schedules that charge the indigent the same as the millionaire. Fixed fines and fees can trap those with limited means in a cycle of fines, fees, jail for failure to pay, more fines, etc. Fine schedules could be developed that set fines based on multiples of the individual’s daily wage (perhaps setting the minimum at the minimum wage for those intermittently employed—for example, $58 representing eight hours of wage at $7.25). Similarly, fees could be adjusted to reflect ability to pay. Neither of these should preclude the ability of judges to waive fees and fines for those unlikely to ever be able to make the payments. In clear cases of indigence, courts should have the authority to waive all fines, fees, and surcharges.” 8

Policy changes that constrained judicial discretion at sentencing have concomitantly led to increased prosecutorial discretion at charging and plea bargaining. Prosecutors decide whether to file charges that trigger mandatory minimum sentences, life without parole sentences, or habitual offender provisions; whether to dismiss these charges during plea bargaining; and whether to file (and later dismiss) collateral charges that lead to punitive sentence enhancements. An immediate effort needs to be made to hold prosecutors accountable by requiring that they file charges only for offenses for which there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt and a reasonable likelihood of conviction at trial, and by mandating that plea negotiations be in writing and on the record. Prosecutors also should consider establishing sentencing review units that would identify, evaluate, and rectify sentences deemed excessive and disproportionate.

Reconsider Probation and Parole Practices that Contribute to Mass Incarceration  

Jurisdictions should reconsider probation and parole policies and practices that contribute to mass incarceration. In many jurisdictions, a large proportion of those admitted to jail or prison are individuals who violated the conditions of probation or parole. To rectify this, the conditions imposed on individuals placed on probation or parole should be reasonable (and not designed to set them up for failure), judges should use graduated sanctions in responding to probation/parole violations, and probation or parole should be revoked, and a jail or prison sentence imposed, only for repeated or egregious technical violations or for serious new crimes.

MEDIUM-TERM REFORMS

There should be investment in ongoing performance measurement—across the decision points—so that stakeholders can begin to understand the aggregate impacts of individual decisions. The law at its core is about the individual—the individual victim, the individual defendant, and the individual case. But the decisions that are made individually add up to crowded jails and prisons. These performance measurement systems are not necessarily complex—for example, dashboards to track variation in judicial sentencing or to monitor who is being held in jail provide insight into the overall consequences of the dispensation of justice.

Developing and monitoring these process metrics are simply good business practices. Just as a well-run restaurant knows exactly how many ingredients are needed and how long it takes to process each part of an order, a local justice system should know the details of who is in their jail and why. Prosecutors should know how their offices and individual prosecutors manage caseloads and outcomes. Judges should know how their sentencing stacks up with their peers.

Mid-term improvements require more sophisticated inter-agency approaches by law enforcement, prosecutors, and the courts. 9 These agencies have wide discretion to institute diversion programs, problem-solving courts, and other alternatives to incarceration, and they should collaborate with social service agencies and with public health and educational professionals to address underlying issues, such as behavioral health, substance abuse, or homelessness, that lead to local justice system intervention. Such inter-agency approaches to developing programs reflect that the complex needs of individuals caught in the justice system are the responsibility of society more broadly and not of a justice system poorly equipped and financed to address lifetimes of cumulative disadvantage. These programs need to be adequately funded and designed to provide positive pathways forward. One misunderstanding that accompanied the many early reentry programs was the assumption that the programs and services needed to address the needs and deficits of returning prisoners already existed in communities and only needed to be harnessed through planning and case management. Evaluations of some of the largest federally funded reentry grant programs have repeatedly shown that few individuals releasing from prison access services to address their needs—as services are not available or competing demands such as finding and keeping employment or lack of transportation preclude engagement. Emerging support for the hypothesis that desisting from criminal behavior may have different roots than simply addressing deficits correlated with offending like substance use also suggests that these programs should divert to a positive lifestyle through demonstrations and support for alternative identities. 10

LONG-TERM REFORMS

Mass incarceration is the result of several decades of policy decisions, and unwinding mass incarceration will require a long-term approach designed to slow the flow of individuals into jails and prisons and to reduce the lengths of sentences they are serving. Pretrial detention is an important component of mass incarceration; something to consider is restricting the crimes for which individuals are booked into jail and establishing a presumption for release for all but the most serious offenses and the individuals who pose the most serious flight risks.

In the long run, the criminal codes that govern the imposition of punishment in municipal, state, and federal justice systems in the United States need to be reformed to ensure that punishment is commensurate with the seriousness of the crime. This will entail ratcheting downward the sentencing ranges associated with various combinations of offense seriousness and criminal history, enhancing eligibility for probation, reducing sentence enhancements for aggravating circumstances, and increasing sentence discounts for mitigating circumstances. In addition, mandatory minimum sentencing statutes and two- and three-strikes laws should be repealed or, if that proves politically unpalatable, dramatically scaled back to ensure that the punishment fits the crime. Jurisdictions also should revise truth-in-sentencing and life sentencing statutes by reducing the amount of time offenders must serve before being eligible for release and should eliminate life without the possibility of parole sentences for all but the most heinous crimes.

Recommendations for Future Research

Justice requires identifying and confirming more effective and cost-efficient ways of securing appropriate outcomes for society, for victims, and for those charged with and convicted of crimes. Reforms should be surrounded with rigorous research and ongoing performance measurement. Basic research is needed to better understand the relationships between policy alternatives and outcomes, and evaluation is needed to ensure that reforms lead to better outcomes, to identify unintended negative consequences, and to embark on a path of continuous improvement of the justice system.

Researchers studying pretrial systems need to assess the impact of current practices and potential reforms on the crime rate, sentencing punitiveness, mass incarceration, and unwarranted disparity in pretrial detention. First, there needs to be more research on cumulative disadvantage to understand how disparities at earlier stages of the process (i.e., pretrial detention) accumulate across the life course of a criminal case to produce harsher treatment of certain categories of offenders. Second, research on the pretrial process needs to address and answer the following questions:

• Do financial conditions increase court attendance and decrease crime rates compared to release on recognizance (ROR) or non-financial conditions?
• Does the amount of bail affect outcomes?
• How consequential are pretrial decisions in future decisions about conviction and sentencing? And on future criminal behavior?
• What are the factors associated with failure to appear? Is there a relationship between the seriousness of the charged offense or the severity of the prior record and failure to appear?
• How does defense counsel at first appearance affect detention decisions and case outcomes?
• What are the effects of pretrial conditions and supervision practices on failure to appear and new criminal activity?
• How dangerous are pretrial releasees? What is the nature of criminal activity during pretrial release?
• What considerations and conditions need to attend release decisions for special categories of offenders that may pose special risks to victims (e.g., domestic violence cases) or to justice (e.g., defendants that pose special concerns with respect to witness intimidation)?

Sentencing researchers should examine decisions to sentence offenders to life—and especially to life without the possibility of parole; these consequential decisions have not been subjected to the type of empirical scrutiny directed at other sentencing outcomes and thus little is known about the existence of or extent of unwarranted disparities in the application of these punitive punishments. Research is needed to assess the impact of different types of punishment on recidivism rates—that is, to determine whether more punitive sentences lead to higher or lower recidivism rates and whether this relationship varies depending upon the offense of conviction. We know that those sentenced in the United States are more likely to be incarcerated, and for longer terms, than similar individuals in peer countries. What is not known is whether these harsher punishments produce any positive “added value” for society at large.

Research is needed to produce better estimates of the “costs of punishment” across the justice system and society. These estimates should include the explicit costs to local, state, and federal jurisdictions, but also the implicit costs to individuals, their families, and their communities. These efforts should be accompanied by new work to update estimates of the cost of crimes—both the cost to the criminal justice system but also the costs to victims. These sets of studies will provide the foundations for balancing the costs of crime with the costs of punishment.

And, finally, evaluation research should study the process, outcomes, impacts, and costs and benefits of pretrial and sentencing reforms. This research should help to identify what works and what does not work, including identifying unexpected consequences of reform. This research should clearly identify the goals of the reform and then assess how well those goals are met. For example, if changes in detention decisionmaking are intended to reduce racial disparity, a rigorous evaluation should assess the extent to which decisionmaking changes, whether those changes are commensurate with what was envisioned, had an impact on disparity.

Pretrial release and sentencing policies and practices are a root cause of mass incarceration in the United States. Moreover, these inflexible and punitive policies have disparate effects on the poor and people of color, are not cost effective, and often result in punishment that is disproportionate to the seriousness of the crime. We have outlined a series of short- medium- and long-term reforms designed to slow the flow of people into our nation’s jails and prisons, reduce the number of persons now incarcerated and the lengths of sentences they are serving, and ameliorate unwarranted disparities and unfairness. We also have articulated a series of issues for future research; answers to the questions we pose will be critical to understanding the cost, benefits, and effectiveness of pretrial and sentencing reforms.

RECOMMENDED READING

Clear, Todd R. 2008. “The Effects of High Imprisonment Rates on Communities.” Crime and Justice. 37: 97–132.

Gottschalk, Marie. 2015. Caught: The Prison State and the Lockdown of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Mauer, Marc, and Ashley Nellis. 2018. The Meaning of Life: The Case for Abolishing Life Sentences. New York: The New Press.

National Research Council. 2014. The Growth of Incarceration in the United States: Exploring Causes and Consequences. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Pfaff, John F. 2017. Locked In: The True Causes of Mass Incarceration—and How to Achieve Real Reform. New York: Basic Books.

Tonry, Michael. 2014. “Remodeling American -Sentencing: A Ten-Step Blueprint for Moving Past Mass Incarceration.” Criminology & Public Policy 13: 503–533.

• At year-end 2019, there were 1.43 million persons incarcerated in state and federal prisons, and the U.S. incarceration rate was 539 per 100,000 individuals 18 and older. (Carson, E.A. October 2020. Prisoners in 2019. S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. NCJ 255115). County and city jails held 738,400 prisoners, mid-year 2018 (Zeng, Z. March 2020. Jail Inmates in 2018 . U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. NCJ 253044).
• Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice. (February 2012). Report to Congress Violent Offender Incarceration and Truth-In-Sentencing Incentive Formula Grant Program . https://bja.ojp.gov/sites/g/files/xyckuh186/files/media/document/voitis-final-report.pdf .
• In 1970, the incarceration rate in the U.S. was about 100 individuals per 100,000 population—consistent with what had been observed throughout the 20th The U.S. prison population increased every year from 1975 to 2008, when 1.61 million individuals were in U.S. prisons (a rate of 506 per 100,000). Although the number of persons incarcerated has since declined, in 2019 there were still 1.43 million persons incarcerated in state and federal prisons (a rate of 419 per 100,000). Local jail populations saw similar increases—from 256,615 in 1985 (108 individuals per 100,000 population) to 738,400 in 2018 (226 per 100,000 population). The number of persons on probation also increased, from 923,000 in 1976 to 3.54 million in 2018, suggesting that the increase in incarceration was not driven by diverting individuals from probation to prison. See Minton, T. and Golinelli, D. (2014). Jail inmates at midyear 2013-Statistical tables . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. NCJ 245350; Zeng, Z. (2020). Jail inmates in 2018 . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. NCJ 253044; and Kaeble, D. and Alper, M. (2020). Probation and parole in the United States, 2017-2018. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. NCJ 252072.
• Hyland, S. Justice Expenditure and Employment Extracts 2016, Preliminary. NCJ 254126. https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6728 .
• Violent offending is rare compared to property and public order crimes (Morgan, R. and Truman, J. (2020). Criminal Victimization. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics. NCJ 255113. Judicial officers express particular concern about releasing those arrested for domestic violence fearing a repeat or escalation of the behavior that led to the arrest.
• The $50 estimate is on the lower end of estimates of average daily jail costs, with many daily jail rates ranging between $150 and $200. In New York City, the Independent Budget Office estimated jail costs at nearly $460 per day, suggesting that it costs taxpayers $168,000 per year to jail one person (New York City Independent Budget Office, 2013).
• Schierenbeck, A. (2018). The constitutionality of income-based fines. The University of Chicago Law Review 85, 8, 1869–1925.
• See p. 278 of Shannon, S., Huebner, B. M, Harris, A., Martin, K., Patillo, M., Pettit, B., et al. (2020). The Broad Scope and Variation of Monetary Sanctions: Evidence From Eight States. UCLA Criminal Justice Law Review, 4(1). Retrieved from https://escholarship.org/uc/item/64t2w833 or Alexes’ work more generally)
• State and local Criminal Justice Coordinating Committees (CJCCs) offer on potential model for inter-agency approaches. There are various configurations for CJCCs which are locally focused but offer lessons that can translate well to other jurisdictions. (See, for example, https://nicic.gov/criminal-justice-coordinating-committees)
• For example, the Prison Cells to Ph.D. or Prison to Professional program https://www.fromprisoncellstophd.org/ .

Governance Studies

Elaine Kamarck

February 29, 2024

Vanessa Williamson, Zach Benzaoui

February 26, 2024

Russell Wheeler

January 10, 2024

• Frontiers in Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Research Topics

Mental Health and Criminal Justice: Bridging the Gap

Total Downloads

Total Views and Downloads

About this Research Topic

People with severe mental disorders are highly over-represented throughout the criminal justice system including within prison, jail and community correctional settings. Several intervention strategies have emerged in recent years to address this problem including problem solving courts, specialized police ...

Important Note : All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.

Topic Editors

Topic coordinators, recent articles, submission deadlines.

Submission closed.

Participating Journals

Total views.

• Demographics

No records found

total views article views downloads topic views

Top countries

Top referring sites, about frontiers research topics.

With their unique mixes of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author.

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Suggested Results

Antes de cambiar....

Esta página no está disponible en español

¿Le gustaría continuar en la página de inicio de Brennan Center en español?

al Brennan Center en inglés

al Brennan Center en español

Informed citizens are our democracy’s best defense.

We respect your privacy .

• Analysis & Opinion

Why Inclusive Criminal Justice Research Matters

Why Inclusive Criminal Justice Research Matters

Engaging with impacted community leaders can help contextualize data and drive solutions.

• Accurate Crime Data
• Social & Economic Harm

A new Brennan Center study of recent trends and persistent racial disparities in New York City’s misdemeanor enforcement system showcases the benefits of taking an  inclusive approach  to criminal justice research and policymaking. In addition to examining court data between 2016 and 2022, researchers conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 166 stakeholders, including law enforcement and impacted Black and Latino community leaders, to understand the context behind the numbers. Working with people impacted by the criminal justice system as collaborators and integrating their expertise throughout the research process strengthened our data analysis and allowed us to craft actionable recommendations for improving approaches to minor offenses.

Although these practices have long been used in fields like  public health ,  education , and  democracy , inclusive research approaches have now expanded to criminal justice, specifically to address the  structural factors  that drive  racial disparities  in the criminal justice system. These are also known as  community-engaged research  or  participatory action research . For example, recent studies about  youth gun culture ,  prosecutorial reforms , and  prisons  engage community members with lived experience as fellow experts to collaboratively conduct research and develop recommendations. In contrast, traditional research methods have historically treated  marginalized groups , including justice-involved people, as subjects in need of intervention. This has also led to the exploitation of community knowledge — where members are too often  pathologized  — without accountability and transparency from research institutions.

In studying minor offenses, Brennan Center researchers adopted three core inclusive research strategies. First, we worked to forge connections with a wide range of key stakeholders, especially community leaders most impacted by the justice system who are typically excluded from research. Strong relationships cannot be formed overnight. Rather, community partnerships require long-term and sustained efforts in active listening, transparency, and mutual exchange. To develop our skills, we facilitated ongoing trainings and debriefs on qualitative interviewing and analysis,  cultural humility ,  community engagement , and  research accountability  practices. These tools allowed us to grapple with the responsibility and privilege of being outside researchers invited into programs and communities. They also ensured that we were able to accurately capture stakeholders’ experiences and recommendations.

Second, participants were compensated for their time and expertise — a core principle of this research approach. This builds on a standard research practice that enjoins researchers to reimburse people for any significant study contributions, including feedback from subject matter experts. Impacted community leaders are no exception. We also accommodated individuals’ needs and preferences in study participation, such as arranging virtual or in-person discussions and scheduling to accommodate work, childcare, and other commitments. Additionally, host organizations received compensation for recruitment and meeting spaces used for qualitative engagement. Showing stakeholders that they are valued facilitates participation and stronger partnerships with community experts.

Finally, as a critical part of the methodology, some community stakeholders reviewed the quantitative data to help researchers understand the experiences behind the numbers. Resulting themes identified by stakeholders support growing research that highlights how structural factors like housing instability, poorer health, and lack of economic opportunity — referred to as the  social determinants of justice  — are likely what drive interactions with New York City’s minor offense system.

Participants also recommended solutions to tackle some of these factors. As highlighted in an  accompanying Brennan Center resource , these included better addressing structural needs related to health and housing, such as specialized court  diversion programs  (e.g., for mental health and substance use),  alternative responses  for behavioral health crises, more  supportive housing  for justice-involved people, and community-led  prevention models . Of note, researchers found common ground across community, nonprofit, and government stakeholders in expanding solutions that more substantively address community safety. A common frustration among community leaders is how government officials and nonprofits do not consult people most impacted by the justice system when developing and implementing programs and policy reforms, despite their proximity to and knowledge of the issues in their communities.

Adopting an inclusive research approach with a wide range of stakeholders, especially with members of impacted communities, led to more robust findings. However, challenges remain in applying the approach more broadly. Inclusive research requires significant time and resources to build trusting relationships with community-based partners. Furthermore, the location of research, whether courts, jails, or prisons, may be challenging for this approach. That is because security mandates, restrictive conditions, and intense surveillance are obstacles to ensuring confidentiality.

While not all studies may be able to implement a full participatory methodology, it is important, nonetheless, to grow organizational capacity for inclusive research approaches. Maintaining long-term relationships with community partners and incorporating community-informed analyses, for example, can be a boon in better ensuring that communities are connected, represented, and invested in the research. We recommend that such approaches be more widely adopted in criminal justice policymaking and research in the future.

Related Issues:

• Social & Economic Harm

Related Resources

Misdemeanor Enforcement Trends in New York City, 2016–2022

Cases have declined, yet low-income Black and Latino New Yorkers continue to disproportionately face charges.

Josephine Wonsun Hahn

Ram Subramanian

Tiffany Sanabia

The Hidden Toll of New York City’s Misdemeanor System

Caseloads are shrinking but remain a burden on communities and government resources.

Myth vs. Reality: Trends in Retail Theft

Despite spikes in some cities, crime data doesn’t show a nationwide increase in shoplifting and other forms of retail theft.

Fact-Checking Trump’s Speech on Crime and Immigrants

Trump misleads about crime and public safety, again, criminal justice reforms aren’t driving rising crime, analyzing the fbi’s national crime data on 2022 — with an eye toward 2023 trends, crime trends in 2021–22: what we know so far, informed citizens are democracy’s best defense.

Change Password

Your password must have 6 characters or more:.

• a lower case character, 
• an upper case character, 
• a special character 

Password Changed Successfully

Your password has been changed

Create your account

Forget yout password.

Enter your email address below and we will send you the reset instructions

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to reset your password

Forgot your Username?

Enter your email address below and we will send you your username

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username

• April 01, 2024 | VOL. 75, NO. 4 CURRENT ISSUE pp.307-398
• March 01, 2024 | VOL. 75, NO. 3 pp.203-304
• February 01, 2024 | VOL. 75, NO. 2 pp.107-201
• January 01, 2024 | VOL. 75, NO. 1 pp.1-71

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use , including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

Meeting the Needs of Justice-Involved People With Serious Mental Illness Within Community Behavioral Health Systems

• Natalie Bonfine , Ph.D. ,
• Amy Blank Wilson , Ph.D., L.S.W. ,
• Mark R. Munetz , M.D.

Search for more papers by this author

The overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the criminal justice system is a complex problem. A long-standing explanation for this phenomenon, the criminalization hypothesis, posits that policy changes that shifted the care of people with serious mental illness from psychiatric hospitals to an underfunded community treatment setting resulted in their overrepresentation within the criminal justice system. This framework has driven the development of interventions to connect people with serious mental illness to needed mental health and substance use treatment, a critical component for people in need. However, the criminalization hypothesis is a limited explanation of the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the criminal justice system because it downplays the social and economic forces that have contributed to justice system involvement in general and minimizes the complex clinical, criminogenic, substance use, and social services needs of people with serious mental illness. A new approach is needed that focuses on addressing the multiple factors that contribute to justice involvement for this population. Although the authors’ proposed approach may be viewed as aspirational, they suggest that an integrated community-based behavioral health system—i.e., intercept 0—serve as the focal point for coordinating and integrating services for justice-involved people with serious mental illness.

People with serious mental illness are overrepresented in the justice system. For example, most county jails in the United States house three times as many people with serious mental illness than would be expected from community-based estimates ( 1 ). In this article, we review the complex array of factors that contribute to the problem of the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the justice system and offer suggestions on how an integrated community behavioral health system, including mental health and substance use services, can coordinate efforts across multiple systems to address this problem.

We understand that referring to community mental health and substance use services as a “system” suggests that it is a monolithic entity, when in fact, there is no single community behavioral health system in the United States. Yet this system, no matter how fluid, retains primary responsibility for the care and treatment of people with severe and persistent mental illness. Factors that create variability in the delivery and availability of services in the community behavioral health system include the rising influence of Medicaid and Medicaid managed care, the resulting diminished authority of state and county mental health authorities, the variation among states that did and did not choose to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, and the efforts to integrate mental health and substance use treatment with the larger health care system ( 2 , 3 ). However, despite the varied and evolving nature of community mental health and substance use services, we believe that there are compelling interests—both fiscal and humanitarian—to effectively address the needs of people with serious mental illness who become involved in the criminal justice system, and no system is more familiar with or more equipped to meet the needs of this population than the behavioral health system. This article presents a vision that we hope will help guide the development of new and needed practices and policies to better meet the needs of people with serious mental illness who become involved with the criminal justice system.

Unpacking the Overrepresentation of People With Serious Mental Illness in the Justice System

National, state, and local efforts to address the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the justice system have proliferated over the past 20 years. An increasing number of police officers receive training in ways to recognize and safely resolve incidents involving people with serious mental illness through the crisis intervention team (CIT) model ( 4 ). In addition, many judges are better equipped to manage mental illness in their courtrooms, and probation and parole departments are developing specialized units ( 5 , 6 ). More than 500 counties have signed up for the National Stepping Up Initiative to develop reentry programs to reduce the number of people with mental illness in their county jails ( 7 ).

Editor's Note: This article is part of the Think Bigger, Do Good series commissioned by the Thomas Scattergood Behavioral Health Foundation, Peg’s Foundation, the Patrick P. Lee Foundation, and the Peter & Elizabeth Tower Foundation. The full series can be viewed at www.ThinkBiggerDoGood.org .

Many of these advances were motivated by the criminalization hypothesis, which posits that the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the justice system is the result of deinstitutionalization of psychiatric hospitals, underfunding of community mental health treatment, and tightening of involuntary commitment laws ( 8 , 9 ). According to the criminalization hypothesis, these policy changes created an overburdened and underfunded community mental health services system. As a result, many people with serious mental illness shifted (or drifted) from psychiatric institutions to the criminal justice system. The criminalization hypothesis as originally conceptualized offered an overly simplistic view that the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the justice system was primarily due to their transinstitutionalization from mental health settings into the justice system. This is why we believe that there is a need to refocus our understanding of and approach to addressing the multiple factors that contribute to justice involvement of this population.

First-Generation Criminal Justice Interventions

The criminalization hypothesis led to the development of “first generation” mental health and criminal justice interventions ( 10 , 11 ). Although the content and structure of first-generation interventions vary, the central assumption is that access to mental health services is essential because untreated mental illness is believed to be the key driver of justice involvement for people with serious mental illness ( 10 , 11 ). First-generation interventions for justice-involved people with serious mental illness include programs such as pre- and postbooking diversion programs, mental health courts, specialized probation, forensic assertive community treatment teams, and reentry programs. Although many of these programs are innovative and have shown promise at improving mental health symptomatology, none have been able to achieve a sustained impact on criminal recidivism ( 12 – 15 ). In fact, the service models with the weakest impact on criminal recidivism among justice-involved people with serious mental illness are those most closely aligned with traditional mental health treatment ( 14 ), suggesting that factors other than symptoms of mental illness contribute to justice involvement for this population.

Over the years since the criminalization hypothesis was first postulated, factors associated with criminal justice involvement among people with serious mental illness have been identified. For example, research has found that justice-involved people with serious mental illness have especially high rates of co-occurring substance use disorders that complicate their involvement with the justice system ( 16 ). People with co-occurring mental illness and substance use disorders recidivate more often and more quickly than do those with serious mental illness only ( 17 – 21 ). Yet even evidence-based approaches, such as integrated dual-diagnosis treatment, have failed to reduce justice involvement of people with serious mental illness ( 22 , 23 ). This suggests that although integrated treatment of mental and substance use disorders among justice-involved people with serious mental illness is a necessary part of comprehensive treatment, these clinical services alone will not solve the overrepresentation of this population in the justice system.

The focus of first-generation interventions on mental health treatment as the solution to justice involvement among people with serious mental illness overshadowed other emergent research that suggests that most justice involvement of people with serious mental illness is not the direct result of symptomatic mental illness ( 11 , 24 – 29 ). A newer perspective, known as the criminogenic risk perspective, identifies a broader set of factors at play in justice involvement for people with and without serious mental illness. This perspective is derived from the risk-need-responsivity model, which identifies eight risk factors with the strongest empirical connection to criminal recidivism. These individual-level, psychological criminogenic risk factors include history of antisocial behavior, antisocial personality pattern, antisocial cognition, and antisocial associates—called the “big 4” because they have the strongest association with continued justice involvement ( 30 )—and also substance abuse, family or marital conflict, low educational attainment and unemployment, and lack of appropriate leisure activities, which have a moderate association with recidivism ( 30 ). Recent research has lent support to the criminogenic risk perspective by finding that criminogenic risk factors mediate the risk of recidivism among people with serious mental illness. A growing body of research suggests that justice-involved individuals with serious mental illness may manifest the same criminogenic risk factors as those in the criminal justice system without serious mental illness but at greater rates ( 14 , 25 – 27 ). Taken together, research on co-occurring substance use and the criminogenic risk perspective illustrate another layer of complexity in the treatment needs of justice-involved people with serious mental illness. However, criminogenic needs are not a focus of treatment in most existing mental health services, which is a situation that must be corrected.

Social Factors That Exacerbate Justice Involvement

In addition to the mental health, substance use, and criminogenic treatment needs described above, the multitude of social problems facing many people with serious mental illness also increases their risk of justice involvement ( 31 ). Social problems of poverty, homelessness, unemployment, and low educational attainment accompany serious mental illness ( 11 , 31 , 32 ). An increasing number of researchers and advocates point to poverty as a key driver of justice involvement for people with and without serious mental illness ( 11 , 31 , 33 ). Many people with serious mental illness live in environments and communities where crime, violence, ambient substance use, and social disorganization are endemic, which can increase justice involvement ( 31 , 32 , 34 – 36 ). Living in neighborhoods with disadvantaged conditions is stressful, which may contribute to poor health outcomes and activate justice involvement for some people with serious mental illness ( 11 , 37 ). Therefore, interventions attempting to reduce criminal justice involvement in this population must also address the social and economic factors that contribute to poverty and other social problems.

Social policies that have contributed to mass incarceration for the general population have also affected the number of people with serious mental illness in the justice system. Criminal justice policies, such as the war on drugs, and “tough on crime” policies, such as determinant sentencing and “3 strikes” rules, resulted in a marked increase in populations of jails and prisons for the U.S. general population in the 1980s and 1990s ( 38 – 40 ). These policies have been implemented at a national level within a culture of de facto racism in the post-Civil Rights era in the United States, where people of color are subject to unequal protection of the law and increased surveillance, leading to an overrepresentation of people of color, especially black and Latinx people, at every stage within the criminal justice system ( 40 – 42 ). There is evidence that these disparities extend to people with serious mental illness, because some research has found differential exposure to and experiences within the criminal justice system for people from racial and ethnic minority groups who have mental illness and substance abuse problems ( 43 – 45 ).

Incarceration rates of people with serious mental illness increased along with rates for the general population during this period of mass incarceration, and studies have shown that arrest rates of people with serious mental illness are comparable to rates in community samples ( 31 , 38 , 46 – 49 ). However, the sequelae of justice involvement are much worse for people with serious mental illness, compared with the general population, because once they become involved in the criminal justice system, they are more likely to become entrenched ( 17 , 49 ). They remain incarcerated for longer periods for the same charges, are more likely to be viewed as noncompliant, and have more difficulties with correctional or jail staff and other inmates while incarcerated ( 50 , 51 ). Furthermore, they are more likely to be victimized while incarcerated, compared with the general population ( 52 ), contributing to increased trauma and the psychological toll of incarceration.

People with serious mental illness have complex lives that are not defined by their mental illness alone. As with people in the community generally, their reasons for involvement in the justice system are complex and driven by individual-level clinical, criminogenic, and social service needs, and they are also situated within social and political contexts that contribute to their overrepresentation within the criminal justice system. However, their overrepresentation in the justice system demands a coordinated, multisystem response that reduces or prevents justice involvement while addressing clinical, criminogenic, and substance use needs in a holistic manner.

To accomplish this goal, the community mental health system will have to develop and enhance existing cross-system collaborations with the substance use, criminal justice, and social service systems. Although we cannot expect that a community mental health system can solve the social problems of poverty or structural racism, we believe that if adequately supported, the community mental health system is in the best position to lead in the development of an integrated service system capable of addressing in a seamless manner the multiple treatment needs of justice-involved people with serious mental illness.

The Four-Quadrant Model

The four-quadrant model provides a framework to guide these integration efforts. This service planning tool conceptualizes the complexity of needs in multiple areas (e.g., mental health and substance use) by considering severity of need ( 53 ). Each quadrant depicts possible classification and service responses for clients on the basis of the level of need they manifest for each disorder. For example, people with low mental health and low substance use needs (quadrant I) have different treatment and service needs compared with people with high mental health needs but low substance use needs (quadrant II), and these individuals differ from people with high mental health needs and high substance use needs (quadrant IV).

The complexity of needs of this vulnerable population is why we are focused on making a single system—what we are calling the integrated community behavioral health system—the focal point for services for justice-involved people with serious mental illness. The clinical mental health needs and the substance use needs of justice-involved people with serious mental illness are critical targets of intervention, and providing these services in an integrated and seamless fashion has proved challenging. Further integrating services to address all the treatment needs of justice-involved people with serious mental illness, including criminogenic needs, while also working to develop linkage strategies that facilitate timely access to other essential social services is a big goal. But an even greater challenge is to leave these responsibilities to the criminal justice system, because personnel in that system lack clinical expertise in the treatment of serious mental illnesses, an existing treatment platform on which to build, and a publicly legislated mandate that focuses specifically on the treatment needs of people with serious mental illness. Therefore, if the community behavioral health system does not step up and accept the challenges associated with expanding its service continuum to address the complex treatment needs and the level of services coordination that justice-involved people with serious mental illness require, this substantial, and very vulnerable population, will be left behind.

We understand the high aspirational bar we are setting for what, in many communities, is a fragmented, often incoherent, system. As noted above, the planning role of state mental health authorities has been diminished, and the funding role has been subsumed through the state Medicaid agencies and the state’s contracted managed care companies ( 2 ). Because of these challenges, some advocate for alternative approaches to the vision we describe here. However, given that states have a responsibility to ensure that there is an accountable system for the care and treatment for people with severe and persistent mental illness, whether it is under the direction of the state mental health authority or state Medicaid authority or through careful contracts with managed care companies, there remains a strong interest in reducing overall costs, increasing community safety, and addressing community wellness. As we embark as a field on the development of interventions for justice-involved people with serious mental illness, we believe the time is ripe to develop a new, comprehensive vision of what must happen to effectively address the overrepresentation of this population in the criminal justice system. Opportunities exist for criminal justice and community behavioral health system stakeholders to strategically coordinate and advocate for the mental health and substance use services and the justice and social policy reforms needed to attain the service expansion described above. We explore these opportunities below.

The Sequential Intercept Model: A Guiding Framework

To address the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the justice system, the range of services available to meet the complex service needs of this population must be expanded and integrated. We propose that the behavioral health system serve as the central point of contact for providing an integrated array of services for this population. For this approach to be successful, we need a “second generation” of services that prevents or reduces further justice involvement by providing a broader array of treatment services that meet the complex clinical and criminogenic needs of people with serious mental illness ( 10 , 11 , 54 ). We also must intensify efforts to coordinate with other social services to address basic needs (e.g., income assistance, vocational assistance, and housing) in a streamlined and personalized manner. This is a relatively new concept within a field that has long been devoted to the criminalization hypothesis and to first-generation services to engage people with clinical mental health services.

The sequential intercept model may help achieve this vision. It identifies opportunities for stakeholders from the community behavioral health system and criminal justice system to work together to intervene, diverting people from the justice system to the community behavioral health system. The sequential intercept model provides a conceptual framework to spur the development of a range of interventions designed to prevent justice involvement altogether, ideally by way of an effective, accessible, and criminologically informed mental health treatment system ( 55 – 57 ). The sequential intercept model proposes five points of contact in the criminal justice system at which a person with mental illness can be “intercepted.” These points include the following: intercept 1, interactions with law enforcement and the crisis response system; intercept 2, initial detention and initial hearings; intercept 3, jail and courts after initial hearings; intercept 4, reentry from jail, prison, or a forensic hospital; and intercept 5, community corrections and community support.

Originally in this model, the community mental health system was described as the “ultimate intercept,” where people with serious mental illness at risk of justice involvement or who may have other conditions putting them at risk of such involvement, such as trauma, social disadvantages, or substance dependence, could be identified and an integrated treatment or intervention plan could be enacted or coordinated with the appropriate service system ( 55 ). Thus the ultimate intercept refers to a treatment and service system that is responsive to the diverse, and at times intricately intertwined, needs of people with severe and persistent mental illnesses— ideally, before they ever become involved in the criminal justice system.

Recently Policy Research Associates, which operates the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s (SAMHSA’s) GAINS Center, introduced “intercept 0” within the sequential intercept model and defined it as encompassing “the early intervention points for people with mental and substance use disorders before they are placed under arrest by law enforcement” ( 58 ). Whereas intercept 1 represents a collaborative effort between law enforcement and the behavioral health community to avoid arrest when possible, the concept of intercept 0 recognizes the need for a full crisis response continuum and expands the partnership to broader mental health and law enforcement collaborations ( 58 , 59 ). The discussion around intercept 0 has effectively mobilized advocacy to expand crisis services, as evidenced by the inclusion in the fiscal year 2020 SAMHSA budget passed by the U.S. House of Representatives of a 5% set-aside in block grant funds to the states to enhance crisis services ( 60 ).

Although we fully endorse intercept 0, we believe that it is best conceptualized as a renaming, and perhaps reframing, of what was called the ultimate intercept in the original description of the model. Although crisis services are an important piece of a comprehensive mental health system, they are only one element of the ultimate intercept as originally conceptualized, which also identified the need for evidence-based interventions, including community support services, medications, and vocational and housing services ( 55 ). The vision that we are presenting here is for an integrated behavioral health system to serve as the ultimate intercept, as originally envisioned, which we now call intercept 0, to include accessible, effective, and criminologically informed services for people with serious mental illness to help them avoid entering the justice system altogether ( 55 , 57 , 61 ).

The Behavioral Health System as Intercept 0

For the integrated community behavioral health system to operate as an effective intercept 0, the system must both widen and deepen its array of services. To do so, it will need to master integration at multiple levels. Mental health, substance use, primary medical, criminogenic, and social needs all must be addressed in a coordinated and timely manner to achieve the desired goals of improved health, prevention of institutionalization (hospitalization and incarceration), and overall recovery.

Incorporating multiple layers of integration into the operation of any one system is challenging, but this type of integration is an essential effort aimed at reducing the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the justice system, and we believe it can be done. Because of its focus on prevention, early intervention, and recovery, the community behavioral health system is well poised to lead coordinated efforts to address the multiple needs of people with serious mental illness who are in the justice system. An integrated behavioral health system can focus on the provision of trauma-informed care to reduce the risk of traumatization as people with serious mental illness become involved (or reinvolved) with the justice system. Prevention efforts around substance use and efforts to intervene earlier in the course of serious mental illness have proven to be effective models of lessening the trajectory and harmful impact of illness ( 62 ).

Furthermore, integrated approaches have worked in the past. Historically, community mental health services, substance use services, and overall health care were provided in largely separate systems. To better address the needs of individuals with serious mental illness, there have been considerable efforts to integrate mental health treatment with treatment for co-occurring substance use disorders through integrated dual-diagnosis treatment ( 63 ). More recently, there have been major efforts to further integrate behavioral health care with overall primary health care ( 64 , 65 ), including the current eight-state initiative establishing certified community behavioral health clinics ( 66 ).

There is an increasing awareness of the need to address criminogenic needs of people with serious mental illness to prevent justice involvement. Interventions based in cognitive-behavioral therapy that engage a social learning approach to target specific criminogenic needs (e.g., antisocial behavior or attitudes) have been effective in reducing criminal offending ( 30 ), and evidence is emerging that these approaches can be effective for justice-involved people with serious mental illness ( 67 ). Osher and colleagues ( 51 ) developed a shared framework to integrate approaches to address multiple needs that builds on efforts to classify and treat mental illness and substance use disorders (e.g., the four-quadrant model) by adding the dimension of criminogenic risk. In this framework, individuals may be assessed on the basis of high or low levels of criminogenic need and clinical mental health or substance use treatment needs, and if a broader array of clinical services is available, appropriate service engagement can be arranged to meet these individual needs. There is also recent acknowledgment of the importance of earlier intervention in the trajectory of justice involvement by recognizing both individual factors and social conditions that contribute to criminality and justice involvement ( 33 , 68 ).

The community behavioral health system is also well positioned to address the structural risk factors that drive justice involvement of people with serious mental illness (e.g., poverty, homelessness, and unemployment), either directly or through the coordination of services. There is evidence that suggests that addressing these social determinants of health within the purview of the community behavioral health system can lead to successful outcomes. For instance, supported employment and Housing First initiatives have been shown to effectively increase treatment engagement among people with serious mental illness and also help them gain independent housing or competitive employment and reduce criminal reoffending ( 69 – 71 ).

Our vision is also consistent with current directions and priorities at the federal level. In 2017, the Interdepartmental Serious Mental Illness Coordinating Committee, a partnership among U.S. federal agencies to enhance coordination to improve service access and delivery of care for people with serious mental illness, developed priorities for increasing community partner engagement to address social determinants of health, improve service coordination, and create effective jail diversion opportunities ( 72 ).

Implications for Policy and Practice

Strange as it may seem, having the behavioral health system take the lead in addressing the overrepresentation problem is a significant change in many communities. Justice system leaders assert that they have been placed in the position of taking on the responsibility of justice-involved people with serious mental illness ( 73 ). Many of the newer solutions to the problems confronting this population have been led by sheriffs, judges, and other criminal justice system leaders ( 74 ).

Although mental and substance use disorders and criminogenic needs all need to be addressed, efforts to make the behavioral health system the focal point for the provision of this care will likely encounter resistance. The community behavioral health system may not want to take on this challenge, the criminal justice system may not want to give up control, and social service agencies may not be prepared for the degree of collaboration needed. Within community mental health systems, justice-involved individuals with serious mental illness are perceived to be qualitatively different from other individuals with serious mental illness. As with earlier resistance to integrate care for co-occurring substance use disorders with care for mental illness, community behavioral health system stakeholders should recognize that justice involvement in the population served is common and not a rare exception. Studies have reported a range from 25% to as high as 71% of people with serious mental illness in community samples who have a history of justice involvement ( 75 – 78 ). Community behavioral health agencies and social service agencies will need to make a commitment to integrating approaches and coordinating efforts to reduce the siloed organization of services. They must also be prepared to accept that justice-involved individuals should not be additionally stigmatized but should be welcomed as an appropriate, and substantial, population to be served ( 79 ). Research is needed to improve models of care that can deliver treatments as seamlessly as possible to meet the multiple needs of clients.

Funders of justice and mental health collaborative initiatives may need to rethink funding structures and priorities and ensure that treatment interventions and supports enhance an integrated behavioral health system rather than take place in the justice system. In most parts of the United States, the stark reality is that the publicly funded service system is not adequately supported to take on its daunting tasks. Current efforts to integrate mental health and substance use services within overall health care may run counter to our call for developing specialized service delivery approaches to meet complex medical and social needs of individuals with serious mental illness and justice involvement. We need innovative approaches to funding the behavioral health system that expand service capacity—initiatives such as the certified community behavioral health clinics currently being piloted. These resources may expand further under the proposed Excellence in Community Mental Health and Addiction Treatment Expansion Act.

We also need innovation and adaptability among state and mental health authority leadership. Arizona, for example, has essentially merged its state Medicaid and behavioral health agencies into a single entity and has worked with managed care plans to develop specialized programs for persons with serious mental illness ( 80 , 81 ). Ohio may serve as another example of state leadership that has recognized the need for such vision. The state recently created Recovery Ohio, a plan to improve prevention, treatment, and recovery support efforts. Initially focused on the opioid epidemic, Recovery Ohio quickly expanded to include a broader focus on the mental health and substance use system and now emphasizes the need to address the problem of people with serious mental illness in the justice system. Directors of key state agencies work together with the Recovery Ohio director, who reports directly to the governor. Other states may find a model such as this conducive to effecting change to address a problem that they all face.

National initiatives have emerged to improve system responses to justice-involved people with serious mental illness. The Justice Reinvestment Initiatives supported by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, with technical assistance from the Council of State Governments, and the Safety and Justice Challenge, supported by the MacArthur Foundation, are significant efforts to address unnecessary incarceration. The National Partnership for Pre-Trial Justice, supported by Arnold Ventures, has multiple national partners considering best practices in pretrial detention. And the National Stepping Up Initiative provides a framework for local community stakeholders to collaborate across systems to address the problem.

Ultimately, critics and scholars of the problem of the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the criminal justice system need to change the narrative. Instead of blaming overrepresentation on a failed mental health system or lack of inpatient beds, the complexity of the problem and the need for complex solutions must be acknowledged. In many ways, the community behavioral health system is doing the best it can with the resources it has. New initiatives such as the ones described here require increases in funding for community mental health and substance use services; the competency of these systems in integrating treatment of mental illness, co-occurring substance use, general medical conditions, and criminogenic factors must be enhanced, and new integrated treatments need to be developed and studied. In addition, social determinants of health, such as stable housing, employment, and education, need to be integrated, or addressed in coordination, with treatment. Larger social policies that have driven mass incarceration also need to be acknowledged as disproportionately affecting people with serious mental illness but with a recognition that the behavioral health system cannot fix these issues on its own.

Although an array of stakeholders across the behavioral health, justice, and social services systems can become strong advocates for policy change, they (we) must be joined by the public and policy makers alike. We know that broad advocacy works. Recent successes in states that have expanded Medicaid and the passage of the parity laws show that social policy can improve access to critically needed mental health services. The advocacy we need now could include a push for policy reforms and restructured financing models to increase access to integrated behavioral health services.

Conclusions

The overrepresentation of people with serious mental illness in the justice system is a complex issue that requires systematic change and collaborative problem solving. We believe that an integrated community-based behavioral health system (i.e., intercept 0) is ideally situated to address the complex needs of this population and prevent criminal justice involvement. If adequately supported, this system could provide accessible, effective, and criminologically informed services to address the clinical, criminogenic, and social support services needs of people with serious mental illness who are involved in the justice system. The goal is to identify people who would be best served in community settings and expand the continuum of services available within the behavioral health system to meet people where they live, work, and receive services. The role of the justice system will move toward collaboration and away from the need to build a parallel treatment system to address the treatment needs of justice-involved people with serious mental illness. We believe that this approach can improve individual and systems outcomes by preventing justice involvement, reducing service redundancy, and improving health and quality of life of people who are living in the community. All of society needs to take on the larger social issues that disproportionately affect people with serious mental illness.

In support of this work, the Scattergood Foundation provided a donation of $2,500 each to the Department of Psychiatry, Northeast Ohio Medical University, and to the School of Social Work, University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill ($5,000 total).

The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.

1 Steadman HJ, Osher FC, Robbins PC, et al. : Prevalence of serious mental illness among jail inmates . Psychiatr Serv 2009 ; 60:761–765 Link ,  Google Scholar

2 Frank RG, Goldman HH, Hogan M : Medicaid and mental health: be careful what you ask for . Health Aff 2003 ; 22:101–113 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

3 Mechanic D : Seizing opportunities under the Affordable Care Act for transforming the mental and behavioral health system . Health Aff 2012 ; 31:376–382 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

4 Bonfine N, Ritter C, Munetz MR : Police officer perceptions of the impact of Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) programs . Int J Law Psychiatry 2014 ; 37:341–350 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

5 Lurigio AJ, Epperson MW, Canada KE, et al. : Specialized probation programs for people with mental illness: a review of practices and research . J Crim Justice 2012 ; 35:317–326 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

6 Skeem JL, Emke-Francis P, Louden JE : Probation, mental health, and mandated treatment: a national survey . Crim Justice Behav 2006 ; 33:158–184 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

7 The Stepping Up Initiative: The Counties. New York, Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2019 . https://stepuptogether.org/what-you-can-do Google Scholar

8 Abramson MF : The criminalization of mentally disordered behavior: possible side-effect of a new mental health law . Hosp Community Psychiatry 1972 ; 23:101–105 Abstract ,  Google Scholar

9 Teplin LA : The criminalization of the mentally ill: speculation in search of data . Psychol Bull 1983 ; 94:54–67 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

10 Epperson M, Wolff N, Morgan R, et al. : The Next Generation of Behavioral Health and Criminal Justice Interventions: Improving Outcomes by Improving Interventions . Rutgers, NJ, Center for Behavioral Health Services and Criminal Justice Research, 2011 Google Scholar

11 Epperson MW, Wolff N, Morgan RD, et al. : Envisioning the next generation of behavioral health and criminal justice interventions . Int J Law Psychiatry 2014 ; 37:427–438 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

12 Morrissey J, Meyer P, Cuddeback G : Extending Assertive Community Treatment to criminal justice settings: origins, current evidence, and future directions . Community Ment Health J 2007 ; 43:527–544 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

13 Osher FC, Steadman HJ : Adapting evidence-based practices for persons with mental illness involved with the criminal justice system . Psychiatr Serv 2007 ; 58:1472–1478 Link ,  Google Scholar

14 Skeem JL, Manchak S, Peterson JK : Correctional policy for offenders with mental illness: creating a new paradigm for recidivism reduction . Law Hum Behav 2011 ; 35:110–126 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

15 Steadman HJ, Naples M : Assessing the effectiveness of jail diversion programs for persons with serious mental illness and co-occurring substance use disorders . Behav Sci Law 2005 ; 23:163–170 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

16 Abram KM, Teplin LA : Co-occurring disorders among mentally ill jail detainees: implications for public policy . Am Psychol 1991 ; 46:1036–1045 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

17 Baillargeon J, Binswanger IA, Penn JV, et al. : Psychiatric disorders and repeat incarcerations: the revolving prison door . Am J Psychiatry 2009 ; 166:103–109 Link ,  Google Scholar

18 Hartwell SW : Comparison of offenders with mental illness only and offenders with dual diagnoses . Psychiatr Serv 2004 ; 55:145–150 Link ,  Google Scholar

19 Messina N, Burdon W, Hagopian G, et al. : One year return to custody rates among co-disordered offenders . Behav Sci Law 2004 ; 22:503–518 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

20 Wilson AB, Draine J, Hadley T, et al. : Examining the impact of mental illness and substance use on recidivism in a county jail . Int J Law Psychiatry 2011 ; 34:264–268 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

21 Wilson AB, Draine J, Barrenger S, et al. : Examining the impact of mental illness and substance use on time till re-incarceration in a county jail . Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health Serv Res 2014 ; 41:293–301 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

22 Chandler DW, Spicer G : Integrated treatment for jail recidivists with co-occurring psychiatric and substance use disorders . Community Ment Health J 2006 ; 42:405–425 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

23 Drake RE, Morrissey JP, Mueser KT : The challenge of treating forensic dual diagnosis clients: comment on “integrated treatment for jail recidivists with co-occurring psychiatric and substance use disorders.” Community Ment Health J 2006 ; 42:427–432 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

24 Junginger J, Claypoole K, Laygo R, et al. : Effects of serious mental illness and substance abuse on criminal offenses . Psychiatr Serv 2006 ; 57:879–882 Link ,  Google Scholar

25 Peterson J, Skeem JL, Hart E, et al. : Analyzing offense patterns as a function of mental illness to test the criminalization hypothesis . Psychiatr Serv 2010 ; 61:1217–1222 Link ,  Google Scholar

26 Bonta J, Law M, Hanson K : The prediction of criminal and violent recidivism among mentally disordered offenders: a meta-analysis . Psychol Bull 1998 ; 123:123–142 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

27 Bonta J, Blais J, Wilson HA : A theoretically informed meta-analysis of the risk for general and violent recidivism for mentally disordered offenders . Aggress Violent Behav 2014 ; 19:278–287 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

28 Fisher WH, Silver E, Wolff N : Beyond criminalization: toward a criminologically informed framework for mental health policy and services research . Adm Policy Ment Health Ment Health Serv Res 2006 ; 33:544–557 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

29 Skeem JL, Steadman HJ, Manchak SM : Applicability of the risk-need-responsivity model to persons with mental illness involved in the criminal justice system . Psychiatr Serv 2015 ; 66:916–922 Link ,  Google Scholar

30 Andrews DA, Bonta J : The Psychology of Criminal Conduct , 5th ed. New Providence, NJ, Anderson, 2010 Google Scholar

31 Draine J, Salzer MS, Culhane DP, et al. : Role of social disadvantage in crime, joblessness, and homelessness among persons with serious mental illness . Psychiatr Serv 2002 ; 53:565–573 Link ,  Google Scholar

32 Hiday VA : Mental illness and the criminal justice system ; in A Handbook for the Study of Mental Health: Social Contexts, Theories, and Systems . Edited by Horwitz AV, Scheid TL . New York, Cambridge University Press, 1999 Google Scholar

33 Barkan SE, Rocque M : Socioeconomic status and racism as fundamental causes of street criminality . Crit Criminol 2018 ; 26:211–231 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

34 Robert SA : Socioeconomic position and health: the independent contribution of community socioeconomic context . Annu Rev Sociol 1999 ; 25:489–516 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

35 Sampson RJ, Groves WB : Community structure and crime: testing social disorganization theory . Am J Sociol 1989 ; 94:774–802 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

36 Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F : Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy . Science 1997 ; 277:918–924 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

37 Ross CE, Mirowsky J : Neighborhood disadvantage, disorder, and health . J Health Soc Behav 2001 ; 42:258–276 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

38 Roth A : Insane: America’s Criminal Treatment of Mental Illness . New York, Basic Books, 2018 Google Scholar

39 Economic Perspectives on Incarceration and the Criminal Justice System . Washington, DC, Executive Office of the President of the United States, 2016 Google Scholar

40 Primm AB, Osher FC, Gomez MB : Race and ethnicity, mental health services and cultural competence in the criminal justice system: are we ready to change? Community Ment Health J 2005 ; 41:557–569 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

41 Alexander M : The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness . New York, New Press, 2012 Google Scholar

42 Heitzeg NA : Whiteness, criminality and the double standards of deviance/social control . Contemp Justice Rev 2015 ; 18:197–214 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

43 McCallum KE, MacLean N, Neil Gowensmith W : The impact of defendant ethnicity on the psycholegal opinions of forensic mental health evaluators . Int J Law Psychiatry 2015 ; 39:6–12 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

44 Thompson M : Race, gender and the social construction of mental illness in the criminal justice system . Sociol Perspect 2010 ; 53:99–125 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

45 Thompson M, Newell S, Carlson MJ : Race and access to mental health and substance abuse treatment in the criminal justice system . J Offender Rehabil 2015 ; 55:69–94 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

46 Lamb HR, Weinberger LE : Decarceration of US jails and prisons: where will persons with serious mental illness go? J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 2014 ; 42:489–494 Medline ,  Google Scholar

47 Frank RG, Glied SA : Better but Not Well: Mental Health Policy in the United States Since 1950 . Baltimore, Johns Hopkins Press, 2006 Google Scholar

48 Lurigio AJ : People with serious mental illness in the criminal justice system: causes, consequences and correctives . Prison J 2011 ; 91:66S–86S Crossref ,  Google Scholar

49 Prins SJ : Does transinstitutionalization explain the overrepresentation of people with serious mental illnesses in the criminal justice system? Community Ment Health J 2011 ; 47:716–722 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

50 Ditton PM : Mental Health and Treatment of Inmates and Probationers. Bureau of Justice Statistics: Special Report. Washington, DC, US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 1999 Google Scholar

51 Osher F, D’Amora DA, Plotkin M, et al. : Adults With Behavioral Health Needs Under Correctional Supervision: A Shared Framework for Reducing Recidivism and Promoting Recovery . New York, Council of State Governments Justice Center, 2012 Google Scholar

52 Blitz CL, Wolff N, Shi J : Physical victimization in prison: the role of mental illness . Int J Law Psychiatry 2008 ; 31:385–393 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

53 The New Conceptual Framework for Co-Occurring Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders . Washington, DC, National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors and National Association of State Alcohol/Drug Abuse Directors, 1998 Google Scholar

54 Wolff N, Frueh BC, Huening J, et al. : Practice informs the next generation of behavioral health and criminal justice interventions . Int J Law Psychiatry 2013 ; 36:1–10 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

55 Munetz MR, Griffin PA : Use of the Sequential Intercept Model as an approach to decriminalization of people with serious mental illness . Psychiatr Serv 2006 ; 57:544–549 Link ,  Google Scholar

56 Munetz MR, Griffin PA, Kemp K : Jail diversion: using the Sequential Intercept Model ; in Modern Community Mental Health: An Interdisciplinary Approach . Edited by Yeager KR, Cutler DL, Svendsen D , et al. . New York, Oxford University Press, 2013 Google Scholar

57 Griffin PA, Munetz MR, Bonfine N, et al. : Development of the Sequential Intercept Model: the search for a conceptual model ; in The Sequential Intercept Model and Criminal Justice: Promoting Community Alternatives for Individuals With Serious Mental Illness . Edited by Griffin PA , Heilbrun K , Mulvey EP , et al. . New York, Oxford University Press, 2015 Crossref ,  Google Scholar

58 Abreu D, Parker TW, Noether CD, et al. : Revising the paradigm for jail diversion for people with mental and substance use disorders: Intercept 0 . Behav Sci Law 2017 ; 35:380–395 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

59 Police–Mental Health Collaborations: A Framework for Implementing Effective Law Enforcement Responses for People Who Have Mental Health Needs. New York, Council of State Governments, 2019 Google Scholar

60 Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, Defense, State, Foreign Operations and Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2020, HR 2740, 116th Congress of the United States, 2019 Google Scholar

61 Compton MT, Pope LG, Watson AC : A call to embrace our role at “intercept 0 .” Psychiatr Serv 2019 ; 70:975 Link ,  Google Scholar

62 Kane JM, Schooler NR, Marcy P, et al. : The RAISE early treatment program for first-episode psychosis: background, rationale, and study design . J Clin Psychiatry 2015 ; 76:240–246 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

63 Drake RE, Mercer-McFadden C, Mueser KT, et al. : Review of integrated mental health and substance abuse treatment for patients with dual disorders . Schizophr Bull 1998 ; 24:589–608 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

64 Druss BG, Rohrbaugh RM, Levinson CM, et al. : Integrated medical care for patients with serious psychiatric illness: a randomized trial . Arch Gen Psychiatry 2001 ; 58:861–868 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

65 Mauer BJ : Behavioral Health/Primary Care Integration: The Four Quadrant Model and Evidence-Based Practices . Rockville, MD, National Council for Community Behavioral Healthcare, 2006 Google Scholar

66 Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014, HR 4302. 113th US Congress Google Scholar

67 Wilson AB, Farkas K, Bonfine N, et al. : Interventions that target criminogenic needs for justice-involved persons with serious mental illnesses: a targeted service delivery approach . Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 2018 ; 62:4677–4693 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

68 Pope LG, Hopper K, Davis C, et al. : First-Episode Incarceration: Creating a Recovery-Informed Framework for Integrated Mental Health and Criminal Justice Responses . New York, Vera Institute of Justice, 2016 Google Scholar

69 Bond GR : Supported employment: evidence for an evidence-based practice . Psychiatr Rehabil J 2004 ; 27:345–359 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

70 Tsemberis S, Gulcur L, Nakae M : Housing First, consumer choice, and harm reduction for homeless individuals with a dual diagnosis . Am J Public Health 2004 ; 94:651–656 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

71 Somers JM, Rezansoff SN, Moniruzzaman A, et al. : Housing First reduces re-offending among formerly homeless adults with mental disorders: results of a randomized controlled trial . PLoS One 2013 ; 8: e72946 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

72 The Way Forward: Federal Action for a System that Works for All People Living With SMI and SED and Their Families and Caregivers . Rockville, MD, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Interdepartmental Serious Mental Illness Coordinating Committee, 2017 Google Scholar

73 Criminalization of Mental Illness. Chicago, Cook County Sheriff's Office, 2017 . https://www.cookcountysheriff.org/criminilization-of-mental-illness/ Google Scholar

74 Wilson AB, Draine J : Collaborations between criminal justice and mental health systems for prisoner reentry . Psychiatr Serv 2006 ; 57:875–878 Link ,  Google Scholar

75 Swanson JW, Frisman LK, Robertson AG, et al. : Costs of criminal justice involvement among persons with serious mental illness in Connecticut . Psychiatr Serv 2013 ; 64:630–637 Link ,  Google Scholar

76 Fisher WH, Roy-Bujnowski KM, Grudzinskas AJJ Jr, et al. : Patterns and prevalence of arrest in a statewide cohort of mental health care consumers . Psychiatr Serv 2006 ; 57:1623–1628 Link ,  Google Scholar

77 White MC, Chafetz L, Collins-Bride G, et al. : History of arrest, incarceration and victimization in community-based severely mentally ill . J Community Health 2006 ; 31:123–135 Crossref , Medline ,  Google Scholar

78 Theriot MT, Segal SP : Involvement with the criminal justice system among new clients at outpatient mental health agencies . Psychiatr Serv 2005 ; 56:179–185 Link ,  Google Scholar

79 Bandara SN, Daumit GL, Kennedy-Hendricks A, et al. : Mental health providers’ attitudes about criminal justice-involved clients with serious mental illness . Psychiatr Serv 2018 ; 69:472–475 Link ,  Google Scholar

80 Soper MH : Integrating Behavioral Health into Medicaid Managed Care: Design and Implementation Lessons From State Innovators . Hamilton, NJ, Center for Health Care Strategies, 2016 Google Scholar

81 Bachrach D, Boozang PM, Davis HE : How Arizona Medicaid Accelerated the Integration of Physical and Behavioral Health Services . New York, Commonwealth Fund, 2017 Google Scholar

• Social determinants of mental health in major depressive disorder: Umbrella review of 26 meta-analyses and systematic reviews Psychiatry Research, Vol. 335
• Inequities in Mental Health Services: A 16-Year Longitudinal Study of Youth in the Justice System Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, Vol. 63, No. 4
• Environmental factors’ influence on criminal legal involvement for people with serious mental illness 17 October 2023 | Journal of Social Work, Vol. 24, No. 2
• Development of a Medical Student Elective in Correctional Psychiatry with a Focus on Structural Competency 14 February 2023 | Academic Psychiatry, Vol. 48, No. 1
• Contextual Factors of Mental Health Crisis Calls to Law Enforcement: A Brief Report 28 September 2023 | Community Mental Health Journal, Vol. 60, No. 2
• National and state-level trends in the availability of mental health treatment services tailored to individuals ordered to treatment by a court: United States, 2016, 2018, and 2020 9 January 2024 | Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, Vol. 20
• The role of co-occurring disorders in criminal recidivism and psychiatric recovery among adults with opioid use disorder and criminal-legal involvement: A statewide retrospective cohort study Journal of Substance Use and Addiction Treatment, Vol. 156
• The Judiciarization of People Living with Mental Illness: A Grounded Theory on the Perceptions of Persons Involuntary Admitted in Psychiatric Institution 1 November 2023 | Issues in Mental Health Nursing, Vol. 44, No. 12
• Experience delivering an integrated service model to people with criminal justice system involvement and housing insecurity 2 February 2023 | BMC Public Health, Vol. 23, No. 1
• Contexts shaping misdemeanor system interventions among people with mental illnesses: qualitative findings from a multi-site system mapping exercise 4 April 2023 | Health & Justice, Vol. 11, No. 1
• The effects of stigma and discrimination on help‐seeking behaviour and the role of police contact 1 September 2023 | Australian Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 58, No. 4
• Association of a History of Incarceration and Solitary Confinement with Suicide-Related Outcomes in a General Population Sample from Two U.S. Cities 8 November 2023 | Archives of Suicide Research
• Racial Differences in Self-Report of Mental Illness and Mental Illness Treatment in the Community: An Analysis of Jail Intake Data 21 September 2023 | Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, Vol. 50, No. 6
• Treating Trauma in Criminal Justice-Involved with SMI: “Trauma Is a Huge Part of It” 2 June 2023 | Community Mental Health Journal, Vol. 59, No. 8
• The Sequential Intercept Model and Forensic Assertive Community Treatment (FACT) for People with Serious Mental Illness: Implications for Social Work Practice 1 November 2023 | Journal of Forensic Social Work, Vol. 7, No. 2
• Leah G. Pope , Ph.D. ,
• Ashnee Patel , B.S. ,
• En Fu , Ph.D. ,
• Michael Zingman , M.D., M.P.H. ,
• Amanda Warnock , M.P.H. ,
• Samantha Ellis , B.A. ,
• Oluwaytoyin Ashekun , M.P.H. ,
• Amy Watson , Ph.D. ,
• Jennifer Wood , Ph.D. ,
• Michael T. Compton , M.D., M.P.H.
• Reliance on Community Emergency Departments by People Ever Detained in Jail: Retrospective Cross-Sectional Study Journal of Correctional Health Care, Vol. 29, No. 4
• Co-occurring Medical Multimorbidity, Mental Illness, and Substance Use Disorders Among Older Criminal Legal System-Involved Veterans 19 May 2023 | Medical Care, Vol. 61, No. 7
• Competing Concerns in Efforts to Reduce Criminal Legal Contact Among People with Serious Mental Illnesses: Findings from a Multi-City Study on Misdemeanor Arrests 31 January 2023 | Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, Vol. 50, No. 3
• Review of Major Social Determinants of Health in Schizophrenia-Spectrum Psychotic Disorders: I. Clinical Outcomes 6 April 2023 | Schizophrenia Bulletin, Vol. 372
• Michael T. Compton , M.D., M.P.H. ,
• Adria Zern , M.P.H. ,
• Nili Gesser , Ph.D. ,
• Aaron Stagoff-Belfort , B.A. ,
• Jason Tan de Bibiana , M.Sc. ,
• Amy C. Watson , Ph.D. ,
• Thomas E. Smith , M.D.
• Behavioral Crisis and First Response: Qualitative Interviews with Chicago Stakeholders 25 June 2022 | Community Mental Health Journal, Vol. 59, No. 1
• Amy Ehntholt , Sc.D. ,
• Eric Y. Frimpong , Ph.D. ,
• Grace A. Rowan , Ph.D. ,
• Wahida Ferdousi , Ph.D. ,
• Hannah Swetnam , M.S. ,
• Sahil Chaudhry , M.S. ,
• Marleen Radigan , Dr.P.H. ,
• Thomas E. Smith , M.D. ,
• Merrill Rotter , M.D.
• Neely Myers , Ph.D. ,
• Matthew Hutnyan ,
• Gillian Wright ,
• Garrett Lee , M.P.A.-H.A., C.A.T.C. IV ,
• Paula Woodward ,
• Justin Wilkey ,
• Wayne Young ,
• Elizabeth Bromley , M.D., Ph.D.
• Behavioral health service use post‐jail release and reduced risk of return to jail 7 February 2022 | Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 50, No. 7
• Anna Parisi , Ph.D., M.S.W. ,
• Amy Blank Wilson , Ph.D., M.S.W. ,
• Melissa Villodas , M.S.W., B.A. ,
• Jon Phillips , M.S.W., B.A. ,
• Ehren Dohler , M.S.W., B.A.
• Policy gaps and opportunities: A systematic review of autism spectrum disorder and criminal justice intersections 24 January 2022 | Autism, Vol. 26, No. 5
• Merrill Rotter , M.D. , and
• Michael Compton , M.D.
• New Directions in the Treatment of Justice-Involved Individuals with Severe Mental Illness 5 December 2021
• Supporting Mental Health Recovery, Citizenship, and Social Justice 30 October 2021 | Community Mental Health Journal, Vol. 58, No. 1
• Sarah Y. Vinson , M.D. , and
• Andrea L. Dennis , J.D.
• Preventing and improving interactions between autistic individuals and the criminal justice system: A roadmap for research 17 August 2021 | Autism Research, Vol. 14, No. 10
• Steven K. Hoge , M.D., M.B.A. , and
• Richard J. Bonnie , LL.B.
• Essential Elements of Forensic Assertive Community Treatment Harvard Review of Psychiatry, Vol. 29, No. 4
• Now Is the Time to Support Black Individuals in the US Living With Serious Mental Illness—A Call to Action JAMA Psychiatry, Vol. 78, No. 2
• Examining Criminogenic Risk Levels Among People with Mental Illness Incarcerated in US Jails and Prisons 5 November 2020 | The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, Vol. 60
• The Cal-DSH diversion guidelines 28 October 2020 | CNS Spectrums, Vol. 25, No. 5
• J. Steven Lamberti , M.D. ,
• Robert L. Weisman , D.O.
• Amy Blank Wilson , Ph.D. ,

• Community mental health services
• Jails and prisons/mental health services

Read our research on: Abortion | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Criminal justice, 8 facts about black lives matter.

As we mark 10 years since the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag first appeared on social media, here are eight facts about the Black Lives Matter movement.

#BlackLivesMatter Turns 10

More than 44 million #BlackLivesMatter tweets from nearly 10 million distinct users currently exist on Twitter today. Over half of all existing tweets that include the #BlackLivesMatter hashtag were posted from May to September 2020.

Support for the Black Lives Matter Movement Has Dropped Considerably From Its Peak in 2020

Today, 51% of U.S. adults say they support the Black Lives Matter movement – down from 67% in June 2020. A majority of Americans say the increased focus on race and racial inequality in the past three years hasn't led to improvement for Black Americans.

Fewer than 1% of federal criminal defendants were acquitted in 2022

In 2022, only 290 of 71,954 defendants in federal criminal cases – about 0.4% – went to trial and were acquitted.

Before release of video showing Tyre Nichols’ beating, public views of police conduct had improved modestly

Prior to the Tyre Nichols video release, views of police conduct in the U.S. had improved in three of four measures, with crime an exception.

For Black History Month, a look at what Black Americans say is needed to overcome racial inequality

Most Black adults (63%) say voting is an extremely or very effective strategy for Black progress; only 42% say the same of protesting.

Black Americans differ from other U.S. adults over whether individual or structural racism is a bigger problem

About half of Black adults (52%) say racism in U.S. laws is the bigger problem for Black people, while 43% cite racism by individuals.

Violent crime is a key midterm voting issue, but what does the data say?

With Election Day approaching, here’s a closer look at voter attitudes on violent crime and an analysis of the nation’s violent crime rate.

Black Americans Have a Clear Vision for Reducing Racism but Little Hope It Will Happen

Black Americans support significant reforms to or complete overhauls of several U.S. institutions to ensure fair treatment. Yet even as they assess inequality and ideas about progress, many are pessimistic about whether society and institutions will change in ways that would reduce racism.

How Black Americans view the use of face recognition technology by police

Black Americans are critical of key aspects of policing and criminal justice. But their views on face recognition technology are more nuanced.

Refine Your Results

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

3.2 Research Methods

It is important to study research methods to determine which method would work best in a particular scenario. Below we will examine the top five research methods used by criminologists today: survey, longitudinal, meta analysis, quasi-experimental research, cross-sectional research methods, and the gold standard of research methods – randomized control trial (RCT) method. (trudi)

3.2.1 Survey Research Method

Survey research is a quantitative and qualitative method with two important characteristics. First, the variables of interest are measured using self-reports. In essence, survey researchers ask their participants (who are often called respondents ) to report directly on their own thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. Second, considerable attention is paid to the issue of sampling. In particular, survey researchers have a strong preference for large random samples because they provide the most accurate estimates of what is true in the population. In fact, survey research may be the only approach in which random sampling is routinely used. Beyond these two characteristics, almost anything goes in survey research. Surveys can be long or short. They can be conducted in person, by telephone, through the mail, or over the Internet. They can be about voting intentions, consumer preferences, social attitudes, health, or anything else that it is possible to ask people about and receive meaningful answers. Although survey data are often analyzed using statistics, there are many questions that lend themselves to more qualitative analysis.

3.2.2 Meta Analysis Research Method

Meta-analysis is a research method that involves combining data from multiple studies to draw conclusions about a particular research question or topic. The goal of a meta-analysis is to identify consistent patterns or trends across studies, which can provide more reliable and precise estimates of the effects of an intervention or factor than any single study could provide on its own.

To conduct a meta-analysis, researchers typically begin by identifying a research question and a set of studies that have investigated that question. They then use statistical methods to combine the results of those studies, often weighting each study according to its sample size or other factors. By combining the results of multiple studies, meta-analysis can help to identify consistent findings across studies, as well as identify factors that may explain variability in results across studies.

One example of how a criminologist might employ meta-analysis is to examine the effectiveness of a particular intervention aimed at reducing crime, such as a community policing program. By conducting a meta-analysis of studies that have investigated the effectiveness of community policing, a criminologist could identify whether the intervention consistently leads to reductions in crime across different settings, populations, and study designs. They could also identify factors that may moderate the effectiveness of the intervention, such as the quality of implementation, the characteristics of the community, or the nature of the crime problem being addressed. Such findings could help policymakers and practitioners to make more informed decisions about how to allocate resources and implement crime reduction strategies. (chat gpt)

3.2.3 Quasi-Experimental Research Method

The prefix quasi means “resembling.” Thus quasi-experimental research is research that resembles experimental research but is not true experimental research. Although the independent variable is manipulated, participants are not randomly assigned to conditions or orders of conditions (Cook & Campbell, 1979). Because the independent variable is manipulated before the dependent variable is measured, quasi-experimental research eliminates the directionality problem. But because participants are not randomly assigned—making it likely that there are other differences between conditions—quasi-experimental research does not eliminate the problem of confounding variables. In terms of internal validity, therefore, quasi-experiments are generally somewhere between correlational studies and true experiments.

Quasi-experiments are most likely to be conducted in field settings in which random assignment is difficult or impossible. They are often conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a treatment or program. A criminal justice example of a quasi-experimental research method is the evaluation of a new correctional program in a state prison system. Suppose that a new educational program is implemented in one prison, but not in another prison, due to resource constraints. The correctional system may want to evaluate the impact of the program on the outcomes of the participating prisoners, such as recidivism rates or successful reentry into society after release.

To evaluate the program’s impact, researchers could use a quasi-experimental design by comparing the outcomes of prisoners who participate in the program with those who do not. However, since participation in the program is not randomly assigned, the researchers must take steps to control for other factors that may influence the outcomes, such as prior criminal history or demographic characteristics.

One way to control for these factors is to use statistical techniques, such as regression analysis or propensity score matching, to create comparable groups of participants and non-participants. The researchers can then compare the outcomes of these two groups to evaluate the program’s impact, while accounting for potential confounding factors.

This type of quasi-experimental research design can help correctional systems and policymakers to make informed decisions about the effectiveness of new programs, without requiring the time and resources necessary for a randomized controlled trial. However, it is important to note that quasi-experimental designs may be more prone to bias than randomized controlled trials, and therefore, the findings should be interpreted with caution. (trudi / chat gpt)

3.2.4 Cross-Sectional Research Method

A cross-sectional research method is a research design that involves collecting data from a sample of individuals at a single point in time. A criminal justice example of a cross-sectional research method is a survey of public attitudes towards the police. In this study, a sample of individuals from a particular community or region would be selected and asked to complete a survey about their perceptions of the police, their confidence in the police, and their experiences with the police.

The survey would be administered at a single point in time, such as over the course of a week or a month. The data collected from the survey would provide a snapshot of public attitudes towards the police in the community during that period.

The findings from this cross-sectional research method could help law enforcement agencies to understand the perceptions of the public towards their work, identify areas of concern, and develop strategies to improve police-community relations. For example, if the survey reveals that a significant portion of the community does not trust the police, law enforcement agencies may consider implementing programs to improve transparency and accountability, or increase community engagement efforts.

However, it is important to note that cross-sectional research designs can only provide a snapshot of a particular point in time, and cannot provide information about how attitudes and perceptions may change over time. Longitudinal research designs that track changes in attitudes over time may be necessary to fully understand how attitudes towards the police may be influenced by events or interventions. (trudi / chat gpt)

3.2.5 Randomized Control Trial (RCT) Research Method

A Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) is a research method that involves randomly assigning participants to different groups, typically an intervention group and a control group, to test the effectiveness of an intervention or treatment. The goal of an RCT is to minimize bias and establish a causal relationship between the intervention and the outcome being studied.

• Good randomization will “wash out” any population bias
• Results can be analyzed with established statistical tools
• Populations of participating individuals are clearly identified

Disadvantages

• Expensive in terms of time and money
• Volunteer biases: the population that participates in the study may not be representative of the actual entire population

A criminal justice example of an RCT is the evaluation of a new education program for first-time offenders. In this study, a group of first-time offenders would be randomly assigned to either the intervention group or the control group. The intervention group would participate in free college courses and research opportunities for college credit as well as other types of support to address the underlying causes of their criminal behavior. The control group, on the other hand, would not receive the education program or support and would continue with the traditional criminal justice process.

After the intervention period, both groups would be assessed for outcomes such as recidivism rates or successful completion of probation. The researchers would then compare the outcomes of the two groups to evaluate the effectiveness of the diversion program.

A RCT in this criminal justice setting would provide strong evidence of the effectiveness of the diversion program, since the random assignment of participants to groups would help to control for other factors that may influence the outcomes. By establishing a causal relationship between the intervention and the outcomes, this RCT could help policymakers and practitioners to make informed decisions about the implementation and expansion of the diversion program to reduce recidivism and improve outcomes for first-time offenders. (trudi / chat gpt)

3.2.6 Impact on People’s Lives

Scientific research is a critical tool for successfully navigating our complex world. Without it, we would be forced to rely solely on intuition, other people’s authority, and blind luck. While many of us feel confident in our abilities to decipher and interact with the world around us, history is filled with examples of how very wrong we can be when we fail to recognize the need for evidence in supporting claims. At various times in history, we would have been certain that the sun revolved around a flat earth, that the earth’s continents did not move, and that mental illness was caused by possession. It is through systematic scientific research that we divest ourselves of our preconceived notions and superstitions and gain an objective understanding of ourselves and our world.

Specifically in the field of criminal justice, research is critical because it provides a scientific and evidence-based approach to understanding and addressing the complex problems and issues that arise in the justice system. Through research, criminal justice professionals can gain a better understanding of the root causes of crime, the effectiveness of different intervention programs, and the impact of various policies and practices on public safety and community well-being.

In addition, research helps to identify and address biases and disparities in the criminal justice system. Through rigorous and objective research, criminal justice professionals can gain a better understanding of the factors that contribute to disparities in policing, sentencing, and other aspects of the justice system, and develop evidence-based solutions to address these issues. The Crime Prevention Science sections of each chapter in this textbook provide examples of such research and these sections are included in every chapter to demonstrate how important research is to the improvement of our criminal justice system.

Overall, research is critical in the field of criminal justice because it helps to promote evidence-based practices, improve outcomes, and ensure that the justice system operates fairly and equitably for all.

3.2.7 Statistics on “Other Groups”

Conducting research relies on gathering accurate and reliable data. When analyzing inequities within the Criminal Justice System, race and ethnicity are two of the variables gathered and considered in the research. However, how race and ethnicity are represented in the research can skew the data and cause challenges. For example, the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) disaggregates race into the following categories:

• American Indian or Alaska Native
• Black or African American
• Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

And ethnicity into the following categories:

• Hispanic or Latino
• Not Hispanic or Latino

Simply using these categories can, in and of itself, cause distention and misinformation in how one self-identifies, in that not everyone feels they fit into these groupings. Over the years, the OMB has conducted reviews of race and ethnicity categories and have made some changes, and yet many still do not feel they fit within these prescribed groups. For example, someone may identify with the ethnicity of Hispanic or Latino but may not identify with any of the prescribed race categories. Thus if they chose to leave the race category blank the data would be incomplete or if the race category was a required field, the person may feel compelled to just choose one of the options, even if they didn’t identify as it, thus providing inaccurate information.

Although researchers have the ability to expand these categories, if they so choose, this too can cause misinformation as some research may have more disaggregated data than others. Researchers are also not required to expand these categories, except in a few specific situations, like those in the state of New York in which in December 2021, Governor Kathy Hochul signed New York State Law S.6639-A/A.6896-A. The law requires state agencies, boards, departments, and commissions to include more disaggregated options for Asian races to include: Korean, Tibetan, and Pakistani as well as more disaggregated options for Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander races to include: Samoan and Marshallese (Governor Hochul Signs Package of Legislation to Address Discrimination and Racial Injustice, 2021).

This has led to a number of researchers including “other” categories, allowing individuals to thus choose if they don’t feel they identify with one of the specific categories. Some researchers have also included the fill-in-the blank model in which respondents then check the “other” box and specify their self-identified race. These two options, although more inclusive to self-identification, can lead to additional data reporting issues, in which researchers are not able to aggregate the data due to too many variations in responses. This same concern can be applied in additional data collection categories as well, when the category options are limited and thus have the potential to exclude certain individuals.

3.2.8 Statistics on Native American and Latinx

According to a Bureau of Justice Statistics report in 1999, Native Americans were incarcerated at a rate that was 38% higher than the national average (Greenfield, 1999). More recent data suggest that in jails 9,700 American Indian/Alaskan Native people – or 401 per 100,000 population – were held in local jails across the country as of late June, 2018. That’s almost twice the jail incarceration rates of both white and Hispanic people (187 and 185 per 100,000, respectively) (Zen, 2018). In 19 states, they are more overrepresented in the prison population compared to any other race and ethnicity (Sakala, L., 2010). Between 2010 and 2015, the number of Native Americans incarcerated in federal prisons increased by 27% (Flanigan, 2015). In Alaska, data published by the 2010 US Census revealed that 38% of incarcerated people are American Indian or Alaskan Native despite the fact that they make up only 15% of the total population (Sakala, 2010). Native youth are highly impacted by the US prison system, despite accounting for 1% of the national youth population, 70% of youth taken into federal prison are Native American (Lakota People’s Law Project, 2015). Native American men are admitted to prison at four times the rate of white men, and Native American women are admitted at 6 times the rate of white women(Lakota People’s Law Project, 2015).

Latinos are incarcerated at a rate about 2 times higher than non-Latino whites and are considered one of the fastest-growing minority groups incarcerated (Kopf, Wagner, 2015).

3.2.9 Licenses and Attributions for Research Methods

“3.2 Research Methods” by Trudi Radtke and Megan Gonzalez is licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 , except where otherwise noted.

“3.2.1. Survey Research Method” by Trudi Radtke and Megan Gonzalez is partially adapted from “ Overview of Survey Research ” by Paul C. Price, Rajiv Jhangiani, & I-Chant A. Chiang in Research Methods in Psychology – 2nd Canadian Edition , licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .

“3.2.6. Impact on People’s Lives” by Trudi Radtke and Megan Gonzalez is partially adapted from “ 2.1 Why is Research Important – Introductory Psychology ” by Kathryn Dumper, William Jenkins, Arlene Lacombe, Marilyn Lovett, and Marion Perimutter in Introductory Psychology , licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 .

Introduction to the American Criminal Justice System Copyright © by Sam Arungwa. All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book

A new wave of 'tough-on-crime' laws aim to intimidate criminals. Experts are skeptical.

A recent wave of new policies and ballot measures makes it clear : Many politicians across the country think crime is out-of-control and tougher laws will help fix the problem.

From Louisiana to California, efforts to increase criminal penalties and give more power to police have made it on the books as politicians say they want to make their streets safer. Most Americans (58%), meanwhile, now think the country is not tough enough on crime, a reversal from just a few years earlier (41%), according to public opinion polling from Gallup .

The most recent wave of laws extend to even liberal enclaves like San Francisco, a marked turn from reforms passed years ago in the wake of George Floyd's murder, which sparked a mass awakening to the inequities of the criminal justice system.

Efforts to crack down on crime, commonly called "tough-on-crime" laws, have been studied for years and have been found to boost the number of people in jail, but there's little evidence that they're effective crime deterrent, experts say. That's in part because most people who commit crime aren’t thinking about the penalties for their actions.

Tough-on-crime laws attempt to solve crime by stigmatizing people who commit crimes rather than addressing the root causes, driving mass incarceration and disrupting families and communities while heavily impacting people of color, said Shari Stone-Mediatore, the cofounder of advocacy group Parole Illinois and a professor at Ohio-Wesleyan University.

“It’s not a productive way to deal with social problems” like drug addiction or unemployment, Stone-Mediatore said.

'A stunning turnabout': Voters and lawmakers across US move to reverse criminal justice reform

Because the latest wave of laws follow widespread criminal justice reforms, some experts note the new laws may not be as extreme as some past crime crackdowns.

"They're not going back to the way it was before," said Adam Gelb, President and CEO of the nonpartisan think tank  Council on Criminal Justice . Many recent tough-on-crime laws are essentially rolling back some of the most controversial reforms, "rather than completely rejecting a balanced approach."

He also acknowledged that some policies that have popped up recently may be intended to send a message about crime tolerance rather than stop crime directly.

‘Restored law and order’: Crime rates prompting concern by politicians

Crime rates fluctuate based on innumerable factors, which the U.S. has seen throughout history, according to Jeffrey Bellin, a professor at the William & Mary Law School and the author of “Mass Incarceration Nation: How the United States Became Addicted to Prisons and Jails and How It Can Recover.”

National data on crime rates shows that while crime went up during the early years of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has mostly returned to pre-pandemic levels or below. FBI crime reports show that violent crimes in particular, which jumped in 2020, have come back down. In 2022, there was a 6.1% decrease in murder and non-negligent manslaughter. Rape decreased 5.4% and aggravated assault dropped 1.1%, the data shows. 

Yet robbery increased 1.3%. Property crimes overall increased 7.1% in 2022, with motor vehicle thefts showing the biggest increase at 10.9%. Carjackings increased 8.1% from 2021, including those that led to injury.

“The COVID pandemic was such a shock to the system that it created all sorts of distortions, not just in terms of how people were behaving,” but also in how policing of communities was carried out, Bellin said.

In Louisiana, which just overhauled its criminal justice system and reversed previous efforts at reform in a special session, crime rates have followed a similar pattern, but the state has had one of the highest homicide rates in the country in recent years.

“(C)riminals have been thriving while our law enforcement officers are more demoralized than ever,” Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry and Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy, both Republicans, said in an opinion article published by USA TODAY’s Network in Louisiana.

“With this Special Session, the Louisiana Legislature restored law and order and put criminals on notice that they will face punishments for their crimes,” they said.

Among the legislation passed: laws that will treat all 17-year-olds who commit crimes as adults, harsher penalties for carjackings and a minimum of 25 years in jail in cases where someone distributes fentanyl in a way that appeals to children, such as the shape, color, taste or packaging design.

Meanwhile in California, San Francisco voted for two propositions that give police more leeway to pursue suspects in vehicles and expand the use of drones and surveillance cameras, and that require welfare recipients to undergo drug treatment. In Washington, D.C., the city council approved public safety measures including establishing “drug-free zones” to target drug-related loitering.

In Oregon, the first state to decriminalize illicit drugs three years ago , politicians have reinstated criminal penalties for possession of some drugs.

READ MORE: 'A stunning turnabout': Voters and lawmakers across US move to reverse criminal justice reform

Low-level offenses often targeted in crime crackdowns

When elected officials want to crack down on crime rates, they often choose to implement harsher sentences for crimes, including lower-level offenses, leading to longer prison sentences and more people in prison. The hope is that keeping criminals off the streets will lessen the amount of crime that is committed, and deter others from committing crime. 

“Tough on crime in this country is a way of thinking about how to deal with social problems that became strongly articulated in the late 70s and 80s,” Stone-Mediatore said. “Since then, study after study has shown that it does not work.” 

A good example of a tough-on-crime approach is the U.S. war on drugs that saw a sharp increase in the number of people sent to prison for drug offenses starting in the 70s, Bellin said. Yet that didn’t reduce the availability of drugs or the number of people using them, Bellin said.

Tough-on-crime laws often target crimes that are easier for police to detect, like drug offenses, rather than the types of crimes that people most care about, like sexual violence and murder, Bellin said. 

When considering what effect tough-on-crime laws have, Bellin said, “what we really mean is tough on the people we catch.”

Want to prevent crime? Make people believe they will be caught, research suggests.

According to Stone-Mediatore and Bellin, research shows people care about getting caught and often have a warped sense of whether they will be.

But laws that increase prison sentences don’t inherently deter them, because the people potentially committing crimes may not know about what those new penalties are.

The National Institute of Justice , a body of the U.S. Department of Justice, found in a 2016 analysis of a wide body of research that: 

• The severity and length of punishment is a less effective deterrent than the certainty of being caught. Police can deter crime by increasing the perception that criminals will be caught. 
• A prison sentence for every person convicted of a crime is not effective at deterring crime. Rather, people who go to prison may learn more effective crime strategies while they’re in prison.
• Research doesn’t prove that the death penalty deters people from committing homicides. 

What can result in reduced violent crimes like murder is expanding law enforcement’s ability to investigate and prosecute those more serious crimes rather than focusing on lower-level crimes like drug offenses. 

“If it's likely that you'll get caught for committing a crime, you're less likely to commit the crime,” Bellin said, regardless of how stiff the penalty is.

Contributing: Kinsey Crowley, USA TODAY; The Associated Press