Reducing racial inequity in courts requires institutional systems, not just attitude change.

Evidence

In chapter 10, Godsil discusses the interventions that may make a difference in decreasing racial disparities in the law—and what conditions must be present for these interventions to work. Drawing on her experience as part of a consortium that partners with criminal justice actors, including defense attorneys, prosecutors, and judges, to prevent unequal treatment of defendants, Godsil emphasizes both structural forces (stemming from the United States’ history of racism) and entrenched prejudicial associations, which may or may not be consciously held. Godsil concludes that moving toward racially equitable outcomes within the CJS requires that society’s stereotypes are prevented from translating into decisions and behavior—and this is only possible if institutions develop new systems and processes. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 37

Categorization

• QUESTION: What specific systems and processes has Godsil’s consortium actually implemented with courts, and do any show measurable results?
• SEED: Angle: why structural redesign—not implicit-bias training alone—is the only lever that reliably changes judicial outcomes, and what that implies for reform budgets.
• XREF: connects to: A judicial system can apply one restriction to minorities while exempting the majority — Neil DeVotta, Sinhalese Buddhist Nationalist…, 256; American confidence in courts is low and deeply split along racial lines — G. Alan Tarr, Judicial Process and Judicial…, 80