Reclaiming the Power to Punish: Legislating and Administrating the California Supermax, 1982–1989

This article examines how increasingly punitive prison conditions, epitomized by the birth and spread of the supermax prison, developed in the United States. This analysis builds on a growing literature about the “new punitiveness” of U.S. punishment policy and its global proliferation. This article shifts the focus away from the policies that have led to increasing rates of incarceration, however, and toward the policies that have shaped the conditions of incarceration. Drawing on archival research and more than 30 oral history interviews with key informants, I examine the administrative and legislative processes that underwrote the supermax innovation in California in the 1980s. During California's late twentieth‐century prison‐building spree, prison administrators deployed multiple rhetorics of risk to extend their control over conditions of confinement in state prisons. As the state invested billions of dollars in prison building initiatives, legislators, who were focused primarily on building prisons faster, ceded authority over prison design and conditions to prison administrators. In the end, rather than implementing legislative policy, prison administrators initiated their own policies, institutionalizing a new form of “supermax” confinement, pushing at the limits of constitutionally acceptable practices.     

Employment After Prison: A Longitudinal Study of Former Prisoners

Finding sustained employment is an important component of the transition from prison to the community for exiting prisoners. Anecdotal reports from former prisoners indicate that most individuals experience great difficulties finding jobs after their release. However, little systematic information is available about the employment experiences of individuals released from prison or the characteristics of former prisoners who are successful in locating employment. Using a causal framework, this paper examines the employment experiences of a multi-state sample of former prisoners, and identifies the individual factors influencing the likelihood of employment after release from prison, using data gathered from interviews with prisoners before and at multiple times after release. Findings indicate that consistent work experience before incarceration, connection to employers before release, and conventional family relationships improve employment outcomes after release. Individuals who relapse to drug use quickly after release, have chronic physical or mental health problems, and are older or nonwhite are employed fewer months after a period of incarceration.     

HOW THE U.S. PRISON BOOM HAS CHANGED THE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PRISON POPULATION

This article provides a demographic exposition of the changes in the U.S prison population during the period of mass incarceration that began in the late twentieth century. By drawing on data from the Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities (1974–2004) for inmates 17–72 years of age (N = 336), we show that the age distribution shifted upward dramatically: Only 16 percent of the state prison population was 40 years old or older in 1974; by 2004, this percentage had doubled to 33 percent with the median age of prisoners rising from 27 to 34 years old. By using an estimable function approach, we find that the change in the age distribution of the prison population is primarily a cohort effect that is driven by the “enhanced” penal careers of the cohorts who hit young adulthood—the prime age of both crime and incarceration—when substance use was at its peak. Period‐specific factors (e.g., proclivity for punishment and incidence of offense) do matter, but they seem to play out more across the life cycles of persons most affected in young adulthood (cohort effects) than across all age groups at one point in time (period effects).     

Sexual victimization against transgender women in prison: Consent and coercion in context

In this article, we conjoin two long‐standing lines of inquiry in criminology—the study of prison life and the study of sexual assault—by using original qualitative and quantitative data from 315 transgender women incarcerated in 27 California men's prisons. In so doing, we advance an analysis of the factors and processes that shape their experience of sexual victimization in prison. The results of qualitative analysis of 198 reported incidents of sexual victimization exhibit a range of types of sexual victimization experienced by transgender women in prison and reveal the centrality of relationships to their experiences of victimization. Findings from logistic regression models buttress the qualitative results, highlighting a factor that consistently and powerfully indicates vulnerability to sexual victimization is involvement in consensual sexual relationships with male prisoners. Together, the data demonstrate the prominence of intimate partner violence in prison, complicate the distinction between consent and unwanted sexual experiences in the lives of transgender women in prisons for men, and shine a light on the workings of gender in a total institution that privileges heteronormativity at the expense of the safety of transgender women in prisons for men. We discuss the implications of our findings in light of timely policy concerns.     

Staff‐Prisoner Relationships,Staff Professionalism,and the Use of Authority in Public‐ and Private‐Sector Prisons

Prison privatization has generally been associated with developments in neoliberal punishment. However, relatively little is known about the specific impact of privatization on the daily life of prisoners, including areas that are particularly salient not just to debates about neoliberal penality, but the wider reconfiguration of public service provision and frontline work. Drawing on a study of values, practices, and quality of life in five private‐sector and two public‐sector prisons in England and Wales, this article seeks to compare and explain three key domains of prison culture and quality: relationships between frontline staff and prisoners, levels of staff professionalism (or jailcraft), and prisoners' experience of state authority. The study identifies some of the characteristic strengths and weaknesses of the public and private prison sectors, particularly in relation to staff professionalism and its impact on the prisoner experience. These findings have relevance beyond the sphere of prisons and punishment.     

A Brief History of Doing Time: The California Institution for Women in the 1960s and the 1990s

Recent scholarship on penality describes profound changes in the ideology, discourses, and policies shaping criminal punishment in the late-twentieth-century United States. To assess the implications of these changes for those subject to criminal punishment, we examine the experiences of women in prison at two key points in the recent history of penality. We compare how imprisonment was practiced and responded to at the California Institution for Women in the early 1960s, when the rehabilitative model dominated official penal discourse, and in the mid-1990s, near the height of the "get tough" era. We find that the ways in which women related and responded to other prisoners, to staff, and to the prison regime, while in some ways specific to one or the other penal era, did not fundamentally change. Thus, penal regimes ostensibly informed by profoundly different rationalities nevertheless structured the daily lives of prisoners through a very similar set of deprivations, restrictions, and assumptions.     

Legal Consciousness of Undocumented Latinos: Fear and Stigma as Barriers to Claims‐Making for First‐ and 1.5‐Generation Immigrants

This article examines the legal consciousness and incorporation experiences of undocumented immigrants in the United States. Although this population may be disaggregated along several axes, one central distinction among them is their age at migration. Those who migrated as adults live out their daily lives in different social contexts than those who migrated as children. Therefore, although all undocumented immigrants are legally banned, their identities, sense of belonging, and interpretation of their status vary. Based on ethnographic observations and in‐depth interviews of Latino undocumented immigrants from 2001 to 2010, I examine how illegality is experienced differently by social position. The findings suggest that the role of life‐stage at migration and work‐versus‐school contexts importantly inform immigrants' legal consciousness. Fear predominates in the legal consciousness of first‐generation undocumented immigrants, while the legal consciousness of the 1.5 generation is more heavily infused with stigma. Fear and stigma are both barriers to claims‐making, but they may affect undocumented immigrants' potential for collective mobilization in different ways.     

Controlling Consensual Sex Among Prisoners

Despite recent legal advances for LGBT citizens, including the Supreme Court's recognition of a constitutional right to engage in private, consensual, same‐sex sex, prisons continue to regulate sex in much the same way they have been doing since the nineteenth century. Nationwide, prisons bar consensual sex among prisoners, and those who violate this policy face severe punishment, including administrative segregation. Interviews with prison officials from twenty‐three states uncover beliefs linking consensual sex with violence that places the overall security of the prison at risk. While supporting LGBT rights and the decriminalization of same‐sex sex in society, officials insist that prisons are not suited for similar change. This article explains why prison officials have been so committed to this policy and argues that the time has come to reconsider prison regulation of consensual sex.     

Same Difference: The “Dilemma of Difference” and the Incarceration of Transgender Prisoners

This article examines the “dilemma of difference” transgender prisoners pose and face within a sex‐segregated prison system organized around the pursuit of safety and security. Our analysis uses data from a study of the culture and experiences of transgender prisoners in four men's prisons. Using qualitative data from interviews with transgender prisoners, focus groups with prisoners, and focus groups with staff, our findings reveal a common contention that transgender prisoners are (according to staff) and should be (according to prisoners) treated like everyone else, despite their unique situations. This further demonstrates the stakes that this dilemma carries for the prison regime and transgender prisoners’ roles in challenging it without engaging in overt resistance—which carries high stakes for them. Accordingly, we elucidate how the rigidity of an institutional structure built on inherent contradictions can have the potential to complicate the achievement of institutional goals.     

论完善对监狱行刑的监督

监狱是自由刑行刑的主要场所。基于刑罚的目的的二元性,监狱兼有惩罚与矫正的双重行刑目标。同时监狱行刑作为特殊的行政权力,具有被滥用的高危风险。为了完整实现行刑目的,保障服刑人员的权利,各国均对监狱的行刑权力设置了相应监督机制,对极易被滥用的行刑权力进行规制。在我国由于报应观念的深植和行刑个别化社会化色彩不强,尤需借鉴先进经验完善对监狱的监督,以确保罪犯改造的效果和行刑程序公正。     

“I'll Make Them Shoot Me”: Accounts of Death Row Prisoners Advocating for Execution

About 11% of death‐sentenced prisoners executed in the United States hastened executions by abandoning their appeals. How do these prisoners persuade courts to allow them to abandon their appeals? Further, how do legal structures and processes organize these explanations, and what do they conceal? An analysis of Texas cases suggests that prisoners marshal explanations for their desires to hasten execution that echo prevailing cultural beliefs about punishment and the death penalty. The coherence of these accounts is amplified by a non‐adversarial, unreliable legal process. This article contributes to our understanding of legal narratives, and expands their analysis to include not only hegemonic stories and legal rules, but also the legal process that generates them.     

Through the Back Door: Applying Theories of Legal Compliance to Illegal Immigration During the Chinese Exclusion Era

This article applies theories of legal compliance to analyze the making of this country's first “illegal immigrants”—Chinese laborers who crossed the U.S.‐Canadian and U.S.‐Mexican borders in defiance of the Chinese exclusion laws (1882–1943). Drawing upon a variety of sources, including unpublished government records, I explore the ways in which Chinese laborers gained surreptitious entry into the United States during this period and ask, what explains their mass noncompliance? I suggest that while an instrumental perspective is useful for understanding these border crossings, it overlooks other important determinants of noncompliance: normative values and opportunity structures. Specifically, the exclusion laws were widely perceived by the Chinese as lacking social and moral legitimacy, and thus not worthy of obedience. In addition, the existence of smuggling networks and liberal immigration policies in Canada and Mexico played a critical role in facilitating noncompliance. The article concludes with a discussion about the benefits and challenges of using this theoretical framework to analyze noncompliance in immigration law.     

Abu Ghraib and the War on Terror—a case against Donald Rumsfeld?

The pictures of the inhuman and abusive treatment of Iraqi prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison shocked the world. The authors of this contribution will take a criminological approach to the crimes committed and will show—by using an analytical framework used by organizational criminologists—that the abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib was an inevitable outcome of the War on Terror as launched by the U.S. administration in a reaction to the terrorist attack launched against it. The abuse at Abu Ghraib which violated U.S. as well as international human rights law was not caused by a few rotten apples as policymakers tried to make us believe, but was a clear example of a state crime. A state crime for which U.S. leaders within the Bush administration such as the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, might be held criminally responsible if they would be prosecuted by the ICC.     

Psychologists as ‘the quiet ones with the power’: understanding indeterminate sentenced prisoners’ experiences of psychological risk assessment in the United Kingdom

ABSTRACT

Prisoners serving indeterminate sentences in the United Kingdom do not know when or if they will be released from prison. Release and progression decisions are determined by the risk the ISP presents of reoffending. This makes the assessment of risk a high stakes business for ISPs. Whilst there is a large body of literature focused on prisoners’ general experiences of prison, there is an absence of specific empirical exploration of prisoners’ experiences of risk assessment. This paper aims to address this gap by reporting the results of a qualitative exploration of ISPs’ experiences of psychological risk assessment. Interviews with 10 ISPs were conducted and analysed using Grounded Theory methods. Analysis indicated that prisoners experienced the prison environment as characterised by violence, volatility and suffering. Psychological risk assessment is embedded within this emotionally and physically challenging context but also contributes to the experience of suffering. Within this context, prisoners felt stuck, powerless and out of control in relation to risk assessment, and experienced psychologists as untrustworthy yet powerful. Understanding prisoners’ experiences is the first step in resolving some of the long-reported difficulties in working relationships between psychologists and prisoners as well as making the process more procedurally just.     

行刑程序与监狱监督论纲——侧重比较研究和可行性的分析

行刑监督是行刑程序不可缺少的重要组成部分。对监狱行刑公权力实行具有一定独立性的监督,不仅有利于保护犯人权益,也有利于监狱对犯人的教育和监狱安全。在我国实行由社会力量进行的独立监督,具有一定的法律和实践基础,是可行的,同时有国外经验可资借鉴。这一机制的建立有利于对公权力实施有效的监督。     

How Law Rules: Torture,Terror, and the Normative Judgments of Iraqi Judges

We present a factorial survey experiment conducted with Iraqi judges during the early military occupation of Iraq. Because U.S. soldiers are immune from prosecution in Iraqi courts, there is no opportunity for these judges to express their views regarding highly publicized torture cases. As legally informed representatives of an occupied nation, however, Iraqi judges arguably have a strong claim to a normative voice on this sensitive subject. We are able to give voice to these judges in this study by using a quasi‐experimental method. This method diminishes social desirability bias in judges' responses and allows us to consider a broad range and combination of factors influencing their normative judgments. We examine why and how the U.S. effort to introduce democracy with an indeterminate rule of law produced unintended and inconsistent results in the normative judgments of Iraqi judges. A critical legal perspective anticipates the influences of indeterminacy, power, and fear in our research. More specifically, we anticipated lenient treatment for guards convicted of torture, especially in trouble cases of Coalition soldiers torturing al Qaeda prisoners. However, the results—which include cross‐level, judge‐case interaction effects—were more varied than theoretically expected. The Iraqi judges responded in disparate and polarized ways. Some judges imposed more severe sentences on Coalition guards convicted of torturing al Qaeda suspects, while others imposed more lenient sentences on the same combination of guards and suspects. The cross‐level interactions indicate that the judges who severely sentenced Coalition guards likely feared the contribution of torture tactics to increasing violence in Iraq. The judges who were less fearful of violence were more lenient and accommodating of torture by Coalition forces. The implication is that the less fearful judges were freed by an indeterminate law to advance Coalition goals through lenient punishment of torture. Our analysis suggests that the introduction of democracy and the rule of law in Iraq is a negative case in the international diffusion of American institutions. The results indicate the need for further development of a nuanced critical legal perspective.     

Understanding the place of punishment: Disadvantage,politics, and the geography of imprisonment in 21st century America

Studies suggest that the spatial distribution of punishment in the United States is shifting. This article analyzes variation in prison admissions across U.S. counties to deepen our understanding of the contemporary geography of punishment. While research on punishment generally treats economic and political theories of punishment as distinct, we draw on recent studies of penal attitudes to develop a theoretical argument regarding their possible interconnection. We then use Hierarchical Linear Modeling to test the hypothesis that conservatism, race, and disadvantage are associated with the use of prison and that these factors help to explain why prison admission rates are higher in rural and suburban counties than in urban ones, despite notably higher crime rates in the latter. The results indicate that nonurban counties send more people to prison than urban counties and that socioeconomic disadvantage, the size of the Black population, and conservatism are significant predictors of prison admissions after controlling for crime‐related problems. These findings suggest that poverty, race, and politics work in concert to shape the distribution of punishment across 21st century America.     

The impact of recidivism and capacity on prison populations

Prison crowding currently poses a serious problem for society. This problem is attributable to a failure to anticipate and plan for the increased numbers of individuals sentenced to prison over the last decade. Crowded prisons have forced many jurisdictions to release prisoners earlier than would have been the case with unlimited prison capacity and to initiate expensive prison construction programs. In this paper, we develop a prison population projection model that extends previous work by considering the impact of limited prison capacity on time served, releases, and future admissions. The model was demonstrated for the State of North Carolina. Results suggest the tradeoffs that exist between prison capacity and punitiveness as measured by time served in prison.Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice.     

Raising the "civilized minimum" of pain amelioration for prisoners to avoid cruel and unusual punishment

This Article addresses the problems with our nation's cultural and legal prohibitions against certain pain management treatments. The practice of pain management has not kept pace with the many medical advances that have made it possible for physicians to ameliorate most pain. The Author notes that some patients are denied access to certain forms of treatments due to the mistaken belief that addiction may ensue. Additionally, some individuals are under-treated for their pain to a greater degree than are others. This is especially the case for our nation's prisoners. The Author contends that prisoners are frequently denied effective pain amelioration. He notes, however, that there has been improvement in medical treatment in general for prisoners due to court challenges based on the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Yet, due to the protection of qualified immunity given to jailers and prison health care providers, prisoners cannot bring a claim for negligence or medical malpractice, they must allege a violation of their constitutional rights, a significantly higher legal standard. Prisoners must meet a subjective test showing that there was a deliberate indifference to their medical needs that violates the protection of the Eighth Amendment. The Author concludes that because medical advances have made it possible to alleviate most pain suffering, withholding pain treatment or providing a less effective treatment is tantamount to inflicting pain and should be viewed as a violation of the Eighth Amendment.     

THE EFFECT OF SUPERMAXIMUM SECURITY PRISONS ON AGGREGATE LEVELS OF INSTITUTIONAL VIOLENCE*

Supermax prisons have been advanced as means of controlling the “worst of the worst” and making prisons safer places to live and work. This research examined the effect of supermaxes on aggregate levels of violence in three prison systems using a multiple interrupted time series design. No support was found for the hypothesis that supermaxes reduce levels of inmate‐on‐inmate violence. Mixed support was found for the hypothesis that supermax increases staff safety: the implementation of a supermax had no effect on levels of inmate‐on‐staff assaults in Minnesota, temporarily increased staff injuries in Arizona, and reduced assaults against staff in Illinois.