Institutional dependency lets judges routinize program use beyond eligibility rules.

Evidence

Indirect evidence that these programs fill critical institutional needs is suggested by the Boston pretrial diversion programs. These programs were utilized beyond their capacity by judges, sometimes without regard for the extremely important initial interview or the relatively stringent eligibility requirements the programs sought to impose in order to maximize effectiveness. Dependent upon judges for referrals and, indeed, for their programs’ existence, administrators found it difficult to refuse judges who referred too many clients, or inappropriate clients, to them. 23 The Veterans Administration hospital system is a fascinating bureaucracy because it employs doctors, the preeminent professionals, in highly rulebound organizations. — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 196

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the reader’s core interest: frontline practice (judges’ referrals) routinizes new classifications faster than the formal eligibility criteria or cultural narrative updates. — connects to: Judges overused diversion programs beyond capacity because administrators depended on referrals — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of…, 196; Judges’ attitudes and institutional context, not law, drive their rulings. — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2438

Broader Connections

• Judges overused diversion programs beyond capacity because administrators depended on referrals #expands (0.85) — Michael Lipsky, Street-Level Bureaucracy, 196
• Judges’ attitudes and institutional context, not law, drive their rulings. #corroborates (0.75) — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 2438