Racial disparity counts as warranted only when legally relevant factors explain it

Evidence

The disparities are often understood as warranted if they stem from some groups having on average more serious offenses or prior violent conviction records, which can explain the more punitive outcomes they face. Nearly four decades ago, in his effort to distinguish between racial discrimination and racial differences in punishment, Alfred Blumstein (1982) wrote: If the racial disproportionality in prisons is directly attributable to criminal justice officials’ discrimination on the basis of race, a massive legal and political effort should be mobilized to redress that evil. If, however, the disproportionality results predominantly from some legally relevant difference between the races, such as a corresponding differential involvement in crime, then the charge of “racism” would not be justified. Indeed, it could be more harmful than helpful. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 557

Categorization

• DEFINE: Defines the warranted versus unwarranted disparity distinction that structures the whole field.