From the Field to the Courthouse: Should Social Science Research Be Privileged?

Social scientists need clarification about the extent to which the confidential aspects of their research are protected from compulsory disclosure in legal proceedings, and the extent to which they ought to be. Investigating the nature of social science research with an emphasis on researcher-participant relationships in ethnographic practice, I conclude that a qualified privilege would confer three major benefits on social science researchers: confidence that the government will not unnecessarily interfere with research, facilitation of improved researcher-participant relationships, and increased accuracy, thoroughness, and reliability of research data. I also discuss the development of privilege and confidentiality issues in practical research contexts through an examination of two criminal cases in which social science researchers refused to divulge the confidential information obtained in the course of research. Finally, I discuss the possible formulations of a scholarly research privilege. This is especially important because courts have cast social scientists as members of the larger community of academic or scholarly researchers with respect to these issues. Potential sources of protection include state journalist protection laws, federal common law, and federal statutory law. Evaluation of these sources and the case law to which they correspond suggests that developing common law privileges in state and federal jurisprudence is the most promising means of affording the confidential aspects of social science research legal protection. As researchers continue to press privilege     

The Effects of Legal and Extralegal Factors on Detention Decisions in US District Courts

The Bail Reform Act of 1984 changed the law dictating release and detention decisions in federal court. Since its passage, few studies have examined judicial decision-making in this context. Legal research enables us to account for the structure and interpretation of federal detention laws and to analyze previously neglected measures of legal factors in our analyses. We use US Sentencing Commission data on a sample of defendants who were sentenced in 2007 (N?=?31,043). We find that legal factors—particularly length of criminal history, having committed a violent or otherwise serious offense, and having committed the offense while under supervision of the criminal justice system—have the strongest relationships with the presentence detention outcome. A defendant’s age, race, and ethnicity have weaker relationships with detention. When we compare defendants who are similarly situated with respect to legal factors, the probability of detention is similar regardless of age, race, and ethnicity.     

Social and economic impact of the commercialization of the Argus II artificial retina in the United States

Each year, the United States invests about $45 billion in research conducted by federal researchers within federal laboratories. These efforts generate extensive social benefits when results are transferred to the private sector. It is important that we effectively quantify the economic and societal impact of federal technology transfer activities to inform taxpayers and policymakers about the value of public investments in this form of research. The Argus II device, an artificial retina commercialized in the United States by Second Sight in 2013, provides a rich example of how private sector innovation can be enhanced by research collaborations with federal labs and academia. Over the 25-year journey from idea to product, Second Sight carried out research and development collaborations with six Department of Energy national laboratories and seven universities. The case of Argus II also offers valuable insight into (1) how private industry, academia, and government can work together to bring socially beneficial innovations to fruition and (2) the tradeoffs inherent in these public–private collaborations. In this paper, we use a Markov model to estimate the realized and potential future social benefits associated with Argus II. We provide an interactive tool that can be used to replicate our findings and modify assumptions using updated patient information as it becomes available. We also provide insight into the aspects of federal involvement surrounding the development of Argus II that contributed to its successful commercialization and discuss other spillover benefits from these public–private collaborations.     

Race,ethnicity, and social change: The democratization of middle‐class crime*

Since the mid‐1970s, the percentage of non‐White people convicted of white‐collar type crimes in the federal judicial system has been growing steadily. In 2015, non‐Whites accounted for more than half of all convictions for certain white‐collar type crimes, but the increase in non‐White participation has not occurred evenly across all race and ethnic groups. Asians and Latinos have increased their participation in white‐collar crime more so than Blacks. Using data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the U.S. Census, we investigate whether the differential increase among race and ethnic groups in white‐collar type crimes can be explained by their differential increase in middle‐class occupations. The findings have implications for opportunity, cultural, and race‐centered perspectives on crime, as well as institutional anomie theory, and they suggest that low‐level white‐collar crimes are being democratized along lines of race and ethnicity.     

Case Baiting

In 2014, New Jersey passed the Sports Wagering Act, permitting sports betting at state casino and racetrack venues, in direct conflict with the federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act. In 2017, South Dakota passed Senate Bill 106, requiring that certain e-commerce retailers collect and remit sales tax, in violation of federal law. The two U.S. Supreme Court decisions arising from challenges to these state statutes—South Dakota v. Wayfair and Murphy v. NCAA—exemplify U.S. Supreme Court “case baiting.” Case baiting is a tactic states implement to challenge federal directives by passing state legislation that directly conflicts with federal law to lure the Court into granting certiorari and ruling in their favor. This article argues that South Dakota's and New Jersey's triumphs pave the way for other jurisdictions to pursue similar strategies across multiple legal issues such as abortion restrictions and immigration law. In addition, this article suggests that case baiting invites further scholarly exploration of important policy considerations, including the use of this tactic as a novel approach to the application of law and strategy, whether case baiting promotes the Court's progression toward a more quasi-legislative role, and whether passing conflict legislation violates state legislators’ oaths of office.     

Telemedicine--the diagnostic tool of the future

The most immediate concern in the development of telemedicine programs, technology, and equipment is the continuation of federal funding. As Congress continues its efforts to balance this year's federal budget, funds for research generally and particularly for the pilot programs discussed above could be cut or eliminated. Federal funding is surprisingly important to the rapid maturation of telemedicine. Without these pilot projects, HCFA believes that it would be unable to assess the effect of Medicare reimbursement for telemedicine consultations. Without such assessment, HCFA may be unwilling to relax the current restrictions on reimbursement for telemedicine outside of pilot programs. HMOs and third-party payors would then be less likely to support telemedicine programs and reimburse providers who participate in them. Similarly, without the promise of federal or private reimbursement, the telecommunications industry will find it harder to justify continuing research and development in new technologies. Nonetheless, even a complete elimination of all federal research monies is likely only to slow the growth of telemedicine, not stop it.     

U.S. ATTORNEYS AND SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE DEPARTURES: TESTING FOR INTERPROSECUTOR DISPARITY*

An important and highly discretionary component of the federal sentencing guidelines is the downward departure for providing substantial assistance. Critics charge that the substantial assistance departure, which requires a motion by the prosecutor, may produce the type of unwarranted sentencing disparity that the guidelines were intended to eliminate. Research reveals, for example, that jurisdictional variations are evident in the use of substance assistance departures (Johnson, Ulmer, and Kramer, 2008; Nagel and Schulhofer, 1992), and that the likelihood of receiving the departure is affected by legally irrelevant offender characteristics, which include race, ethnicity, and gender (Mustard, 2001). The purpose of this article is to extend this research by exploring the degree to which decisions regarding substantial assistance departures vary across prosecutors. Using data on offenders sentenced in three U.S. district courts and a multilevel modeling strategy, we investigate whether interprosecutor disparity exists in the likelihood of substantial assistance departures and in the criteria that prosecutors use in deciding whether to file a motion for a substantial assistance departure. Findings indicate that significant interprosecutor variation remains after taking into account offender characteristics, case characteristics, and the district in which the case is adjudicated.     

The Imperial Judiciary Meets the Impotent Congress?

The continuing debate over an activist judiciary frequently overlooks the issue whether majoritarian institutions such as Congress can be the principal policy makers for a democracy as well as whether they ought to be. An explicit comparison of the institutional capacities of the Congress and federal courts on abortion funding suggests that Congress is capable of developing representative, responsible, and educative policies. However, a retreat by the "Imperial Judiciary" from an activist posture would not necessarily transfer power from the courts to the Congress but from the courts to unelected bureaucracies within the Congress and the Presidency.     

Inequalities and crime

The study of inequalities undergirds much of criminology. At times, however, we may take the impact of inequalities for granted and miss opportunities to problematize the strong link between inequalities and crime. In this address, I maintain that it is important to step back and recognize that economic, race, ethnic, gender, and other inequalities are at the core of criminology. More explicit consensus about the centrality of the link between inequalities and crime will allow for our field to speak to the major social and political issues of our time and will strengthen the field. In this address, I highlight some fruitful avenues of research on inequalities and crime. I then argue that the concept of intersecting inequalities can provide additional connective tissue between research focused on economic, race, ethnic, and gender inequalities. By drawing on recent evaluations of the concept in other fields, I discuss key issues that must be addressed in employing an intersecting inequalities approach and then suggest solutions. I conclude that use of an intersecting inequalities approach has the potential to uncover important insights and span research areas, thereby pushing forward our understanding of the impact of economic, race, ethnic, gender, and other inequalities on crime and victimization.     

Videoconferencing in Criminal Proceedings: Legal and Empirical Issues and Directions for Research

State and federal courts are increasingly using videoconferencing to hold proceedings in criminal cases, including first appearances and arraignments. However, little systematic information is available about the extent of its use, the proceedings for which it is used, how it is implemented, and, most importantly, whether videoconferencing affects the behavior or perceptions of participants in a way that violates a defendant's fundamental rights. In this article we review the legal and empirical issues raised by the use of videoconferencing in criminal cases and describe empirical research that could and, we argue, should, inform policy decisions concerning its use.     

Does Racial Balance in Workforce Representation Yield Equal Justice? Race Relations of Sentencing in Federal Court Organizations*

Increasing racial and ethnic group representation in justice‐related occupations is considered a potential remedy to racial inequality in justice administration, including sentencing disparity. Studies to date yield little evidence of such an effect; however, research limitations may account for the mixed and limited evidence of the significance of justice workforce racial diversity. Specifically, few studies consider group‐level dynamics of race and representation, thus failing to contextualize racial group power relations in justice administration. To consider these contextual dynamics we combine court organizational and case‐level data from 89 federal districts and use hierarchical models to assess whether variably “representative” work groups relate to district‐level differences in sentencing. Using district‐specific indexes of population and work group dissimilarity to define representation, we find no relationships between black judge representation and sentencing in general across districts, but that districts with more black representation among prosecutors are significantly less likely to sentence defendants to terms of imprisonment. We also find in districts with increased black representation among prosecutors, and to a lesser degree among judges, that black defendants are less likely to be imprisoned and white defendants are more likely to be imprisoned, with the effect of narrowing black‐white disparities in sentencing. Consistent with the “power‐threat” perspective, and perhaps “implicit racial bias” research, findings encourage modeling diversity to account for relative racial group power in processes of social control and suggest that racial justice may be moderately advanced by equal representation among authorities.     

Creating the Perfect Human Race: How Far Will We Go for Designer Families?

Genetic modifications in humans is a fast‐advancing field of science, with very little legal regulation. Scientists recently have developed a technique, clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeat (CRISPR), which will forever change this field. Before CRISPR, all methods were too expensive and time consuming to facilitate editing human genes. CRISPR is faster and cheaper, making it a very real possibility for all. Since the discovery of CRISPR, research on human embryos has begun, with a success rate showing that creating a genetically perfect family is very real. In 2015, all federal funding for human genome modifications was banned, leaving little federal control. This Note proposes a model statute that allows for research while providing restrictions to prevent harm.     

Telling the Difference: Nineteenth-Century Legal Narratives of Racial Taxonomy

"Telling the Difference" focuses on two legal opinions from the nineteenth century that carefully distinguish between those who should be racially marked as nonwhite and those who should not. In the first instance, a Michigan judge decides the appropriate "blood fraction" of African-American heritage that would prohibit a free man from voting. In the second, a New Mexico judge rules that the Native Americans of Cochiti Pueblo are not legally "Indians," and therefore not entitled to federal protection of their land. The oracle uses these examples to advance two central claims: that we must pay close attention to the narrative logic of racial identification in order to understand the powerful contradictions still at the heart of our conversations about race, and that in doing so we should consider that race has always been multiply constructed in the United States.     

THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF GUIDELINES CIRCUMVENTION: THE CASE OF FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS*

Recent scholarship on criminal punishments increasingly highlights the importance of courtroom social contexts. Combining recent data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission (FY1997–2000) with aggregate data on federal districts, the current study examines interdistrict variations in the application of downward departures from the federal sentencing guidelines. Findings indicate that substantial variation exists in the probability of both prosecutor‐initiated substantial assistance departures and judge‐initiated downward departures. This variation is accounted for, in part, by organizational court contexts, such as caseload pressures, and by environmental considerations, such as the racial composition of the district. Additional evidence suggests that individual trial penalties and race disparities are conditioned by aggregate court contexts. Drawing on interviews with federal justice personnel, this article concludes with a discussion of future directions for research on federal guidelines departures. Part of the glory of the federal system…is that you've got this one big organization, but it can be molded to different needs…
‐ An assistant U.S. attorney ‐     

Striking Out: Race and Support for Police Use of Force

This research examines whites’ and blacks’ support for police use of force using a survey‐based experiment that varies the race of the offender across four different scenarios. Bivariate results show that the race of the offender influences blacks’ approval for the use of force by police, but does not affect whites’ approval. Multivariate analyses examine whether the factors influencing support for police use of force vary depending on the race of the offender. Results indicate that the predictors for approval of police use of force differ by the race of respondent, the race of offender, and the appropriateness of the use of force. The implications of the results for police–community relations are discussed.     

Federal Criminal Careers: an Empirical Examination of the Post-Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA)

The criminal career paradigm is a major research area but has largely overlooked federal offenders and federal data. Drawing on a population of federal supervised release clients in the Midwestern United States, the current study examined the predictive validity of the federal Post-Conviction Risk Assessment (PCRA) and its subscales for their association with six parameters of the criminal career. Poisson, negative binomial, and logistic regression models showed that PCRA Risk was significantly associated with annual offending rate (lambda), chronicity, prison misconduct, noncompliance on supervised release, having a warrant requested on supervised release, and career criminal status. Various PCRA subscales also were significantly associated with criminal career outcomes especially for current community supervision outcomes. These effects withstood confounding effects for age, sex, race, age of arrest onset, federal criminal history rank, and total prison exposure. The study supported basic criminal career findings using federal data and showed that a standard risk assessment actuarial in the federal system has utility as an indicator of the criminal career.     

Legislation Targeting Sex Offenders: Are Recent Policies Effective in Reducing Rape?

In recent years, several pieces of state and federal legislation have imposed new restrictions on convicted sex offenders, including registration with law enforcement agencies, community notification provisions, and sexually violent predator designations permitting civil commitment following a prison sentence. This paper uses panel data for the American states for the years 1970–2002 to assess the impact of these policies on the rate at which rapes occur. Our research finds no evidence that our current policies reduce the incidence of rape.     

The impact of Federal Alcohol and Drug Abuse block grants on state and local government substance abuse program expenditures: the role of federal oversight

Are the federal Alcohol and Drug Abuse (ADA) block grant funds substituting for or supplementing state and local government spending on substance abuse? Using panel data on state and local government substance abuse programs, this study explores the fiscal effects of the ADA block grant money and the increased enforcement (after 1989) of federal restrictions on state spending of ADA block grants. The findings here reveal that for the current period, the federal ADA grant has no statistically significant effect on state and local government substance abuse spending both before and after 1989, and the increased enforcement of federal restrictions on the ADA grants after 1989 does not change this result. An additional finding is that lagged ADA grants have had a large effect on substance abuse spending both before and after 1989--a feature of the program not considered in previous studies.     

Examining the Impact of Ecological Contexts on Gender Disparity in Federal Sentencing

Gender disparity in sentencing outcomes has been well established in literature. Recent research has increasingly paid attention to social contexts within which judicial decision-making occurs. This study combines these two lines of research by dissecting the nature of gender disparity through ecological lenses. Using 2008–2010 federal sentencing data, we examine the roles of religious and political conservatism in affecting gender-based sentencing disparity. We find that religious and political conservatism reduces gender disparity, with the female discount dissipating in court communities with higher levels of religious and political conservatism. We also find that the conditioning effects of both religious conservatism and political conservatism on gender disparity further interact with race, with black female defendants more likely to be influenced by religious and political conservatism than their white counterparts. Overall, this study contributes to sentencing literature by demonstrating that gender disparity is deeply entrenched in the ecological contexts of court communities.     

A further look at long cycles and criminal justice legislation

This article builds on the work of Barlow and Barlow, who use models based on the long economic cycle as a theoretical and empirical means for reorientating examinations of criminal justice trends. Empirically, using factor-analytic and multivariate logistic and OLS procedures, we find some support for long-cycle-model interpretations of trends in federal criminal justice legislation. Equally important, we find no support for a connection between federal criminal justice legislative trends and levels of crime. Our analysis suggests that economic processes exist independent of economic long cycles and crime trends, and that these also should be considered in discussing trends in crime control. In conclusion, we argue that alternative economically situated, contextualized models which look beyond the crimejustice nexus are needed if criminal justice theory and research are to be revitalized.