Racial sentencing disparities do not reveal which group is treated wrongly

Evidence

These findings underscore that race and gender of the defendant, and race, gender, and political affiliation of the judge, impact case outcomes. Such characteristics of defendants and judges should not matter if justice is to be blind and if cases are to be decided on their merits alone. One important point that needs to be highlighted is that these estimated effects reveal unfairness in the treatment of two (groups of) defendants who have otherwise similar cases, but they do not reveal whether one group is treated harshly or the other group is treated favorably. For example, the result that Black defendants receive longer sentences than Whites may imply that Whites were assigned sentences of “optimal” length but Blacks received sentences that were longer than optimal. Alternatively, it could imply that Blacks were assigned sentences that were correct, but that Whites were treated leniently and received shorter than optimal-length sentences. This point notwithstanding, the results discussed in this section indicate unfair treatment of one group based on factors that should not be determinants of case outcomes. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 751

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Formal rejection of racial profiling leaves racialized incarceration rates untouched — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race: Reflections on…, 466; Crack cocaine sentencing disparity is racially discriminatory in practice — Rebecca A. Martusewicz, Jeff Edmundson, and John Lupinacci, EcoJustice Education: Toward Diverse,…, 1231