Racial discrimination concentrates at early criminal justice stages where discretion is widest

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 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

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.g., Cashmore, 2001; Gato & Dambrun, 2012; LeCount, 2017; Radelet & Pierce, 1985; Sidanius & Liu, 1992; Sidanius, Sinclair, & van Laar, 1996; Sidanius, Liu, Pratto, & Shaw,1994). — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 69 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Racial bias enters criminal justice at every decision stage from legislation to verdict.; Discrimination is greater at earlier criminal justice stages because of official discretion; 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 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Racial discrimination in criminal justice is greatest where officials hold discretion. #corroborates (1.00) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 69
• Racial discrimination in criminal justice declines as discretion narrows at later stages #corroborates (0.92) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 69