Discrimination is greater at earlier criminal justice stages because of official discretion

Evidence

However, the degree to which subordinates are discriminated against within the CJS is also moderated by the stage within the criminal justice process. Discrimination against subordinates tends to be greater at earlier stages of the criminal justice process (e.g., the likelihood of being stopped and arrested by the police; the severity of the initial charges brought) than at later stages of the criminal justice proceedings (e.g., sentence severity, likelihood of probation). While the reasons why discriminatory outcomes are more prevalent in the earlier rather than the later stages of the criminal justice process are not definitively known, there is reason to suspect that these differences are substantially due to the greater discretion afforded to police officers and prosecutors-a situation that allows for the influence of social dominance orientation (SDO) and racial animus to influence official decision-making (e. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 69 (#expands, via linked claim)

While there is still some controversy regarding the existence of racial discrimination within the American criminal justice system (CJS), the bulk of the empirical evidence seems to indicate that African Americans and Latinos are systematically discriminated against within the CJS and at each and every stage of the criminal justice process. All else being equal, compared to European Americans, African Americans and Latinos are significantly more likely to be stopped and frisked by the police, once stopped are more likely to be detained, once detained more likely to be arrested and charged with an offense, once charged are more likely to be indicted and subject to trial, once tried are more likely to be convicted, once convicted are less likely to be granted probation and less likely to be granted parole. They are thus more likely to serve more time in prison than equally situated European American defendants. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 48 (#complicates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Racial discrimination concentrates at early criminal justice stages where discretion is widest; Racial discrimination in criminal justice declines as discretion narrows at later stages — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 69; Racial discrimination in criminal justice is greatest where officials hold discretion. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 69 (+7 more)

Broader Connections

• Racial discrimination concentrates at early criminal justice stages where discretion is widest #corroborates (0.97)
• Racial discrimination in criminal justice is greatest where officials hold discretion. #expands (0.95) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 69
• Racial disparities compound at every stage of the criminal justice process #complicates (0.78) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 48
• Race and class background affect every stage of criminal justice processing #complicates (0.75) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 1349
• Observed sentencing disparities do not necessarily prove judge discrimination #complicates (0.74) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 773