The “STICKINESS” of stigma: Guilt by association after a friend's arrest

Prior research has examined the consequences of one's police contact, but the consequences of vicarious police contact are not as well known. This study expands on labeling theory and the concept of “stickiness” by assessing whether a friend's arrest increases the likelihood of one's police contact. Using a sample of rural youth (N = 13,170), I find that a friend's arrest is associated with an increase in the likelihood of one's first arrest the next year after accounting for other predictors of police contact. Based on my theoretical framework, I interpret this finding as “guilt by association.” In addition, ending relationships with friends who have been arrested does not significantly impact this relationship. This study concludes that police contact may be harmful for a youth's social network and builds on the concept of stickiness by suggesting that stigma not only sticks from one individual to another but may also stay despite efforts to end one's association with the arrested individual. The study expands on preexisting research on the consequences of adolescent police contact by introducing a friend's police contact as a way in which an individual may be more likely to become involved in the justice system.     

Democracy and Disagreement

Abstract. According to Popper's critical rationalism, the possibility of disagreement is at the heart of open societies. If this is assumed to be true, is it not illiberal to try to justify principles of justice, which can be regarded as the subject of an unending collective deliberation? I suggest that it is not, using an analogy with scientific progress. Moreover, I try to show that Rawls's achievement is misunderstood if one forgets that it is supposed to overcome the antinomy between “la liberté des Modemes” and “la liberté des Anciens.” In this respect, I insist on some unnoticed similarities between Rawls's and Popper's points of views. I conclude on the idea of the “neutrality” of the theory of justice, suggesting a link between Rawls's approach and the French republican tradition.     

Research With Considerations of Use

The August Vollmer Award Address is intended to focus on contributions to justice and the recipient's research and policy experiences. This is a story of one person's career focusing mainly on research with “considerations of use.” After receiving a formal education in psychology, social work, and sociology, as well as experience as a practitioner, the author's academic career has primarily focused on the link between research and criminal justice policy and practice. This is the story of that journey and how it was aided by events that could not have been foreseen.     

孔子“义利”观与现代法治和谐理念

孔子思想是第一次文化轴心时代人类思想的伟大创造,儒家社会理想的本原是“和谐”。孔子纳“仁”入“礼”,希望通过体现以民为本的社会正义观的“礼法”体系去整合社会,最终实现社会和谐的目标。在孔子的利、义观中,个人之“利”与个人之“义”并不相互冲突。孔子的“义利”观体现了法律的利益调控功能与正义价值的和谐统一,与和谐社会的法治理念有契合性。孔子思想中所体现的“利”与“义”的和谐统一观,对今天以社会和谐为目标的法治建设具有重要的启示作用。     

Arbitrary Arbitration: Diverting Juveniles Into the Justice System

Abstract Considerable research has examined the effects of diverting juveniles away from the juvenile justice system. These studies have seldom investigated the possibility that diversion may inadvertently “widen the net.” This article assesses the relationship between diversion and net-widening by evaluating a leading Florida-based diversionary program, and this program's capacity to “create a clientele” in order to justify its very existence. The diversionary program under evaluation herein boasts a 98% nonrecidivist rate among its clients, and is touted as a prototype diversionary program for the nation. The current study results, however, indicate that a majority of youths diverted by this program have committed such trivial acts that entrance into any aspect of the juvenile justice system—even under the guise of a diversionary program—seems unwarranted. The results further suggest that among youths who have committed serious juvenile crimes, most are terminated unsuccessfully from this program, and are returned to the justice system for prosecution.     

Legal Aid,Social Workers,and the Redefinition of the Legal Profession in Chile, 1925–1960

This article examines the history of the Chilean Legal Aid Service (Servicio de Asistencia Judicial) from the 1920s until the 1960s. It argues that with the emergence of the “social question”—the concern for improving the lower classes' working and living conditions to promote the nation's modernization and prevent political radicalization—the Chilean legal profession committed to legal aid reform to escape a professional identity crisis. Legal aid allowed lawyers to claim they had a new “social function” advocating on behalf of the poor. However, within legal aid offices, lawyers interacted with female social workers who acted as gatekeepers, mediators, and translators between the lawyers and the poor. This gendered professional complementarity in legal aid offices helped lawyers to put limits on their new “social function”: it allowed them to maintain legal aid as a part‐time activity that did not challenge the structure of the legal system as a whole.     

Contemporary Feminist Perspectives on Social Contract Theory

Abstract. This paper explores two feminist contributions to the analysis of the social contract tradition, comparing the political philosophy of Carole Pateman with the moral theory of Jean Hampton, to ask two questions. First, which points must feminists continue to argue in their critique of the social contract tradition today? The second question is: Can feminists actually draw anything from the social contract tradition today? It argues that Pateman's critique of contractarianism continues to be useful when read in the context of her analysis of “self‐ownership” and subordination rather than as a rewriting of the social contract. Hampton's deployment of a Kantian test for the failure of respect for personhood within domestic (and other) relationships does not undermine Pateman's position. Consideration of how such an ideal can be understood as potentially compatible with Pateman's perspective raises issues about the radical potential within claims for equal respect for personhood. In Hampton's work, widespread “test failure” can be used to indicate that political action rather than moral analysis is required. Hampton assumes that those employing the test are able to abstract themselves sufficiently from their current position to imagine what it would be to be treated as a person. It is argued that this “moral test” should be envisaged as being asked in concert with others, at which point it has the potential to become political action.     

The Politics of a New Legal Regime: Governing International Crime through Domestic Immigration Law

Through an analysis of a unique and understudied unit within the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit (HRVWCU, or “the Unit”), this article addresses the following theoretical and policy question: once someone has been admitted to the United States and granted permanent residency, or even citizenship, how does the law facilitate the reversal of that decision based on acts committed long ago and far away? We argue that the HRVWCU has created a significant new way to govern immigration through crime—specifically international crime—while simultaneously trying to ensure justice for mass atrocities through immigration law. In offering an overview of the Unit's origins and approach in blending international criminal law, domestic criminal law, and immigration law, we show how this Unit reflects an expansion of crimmigration in the United States and abroad. In order to illustrate the dilemma of internationalized crimmigration, the article focuses on the Unit's cases related to war crimes in Liberia and Bosnia, which have two very different (at least from the perspective of international criminal law) types of alleged perpetrators: those who allegedly gave orders and those who allegedly followed orders.     

Why Should Justice Be Seen to Be Done?

A well-known maxim instructs that justice should be seen to be done. When “seen” is understood in the sense of “observed”, the maxim is easily defended: open court proceedings protect against arbitrary and partial decisions. However, when “seen” is understood in the sense of “seem,” the maxim is more puzzling, since it is not obvious why courts should concern themselves with people's perceptions that justice has been done. This article addresses this issue, with a particular focus on the social and other benefits that result when judges observe procedures that are widely regarded as fair, especially in criminal trials. The article draws on empirical studies in social psychology that show that when legal authorities treat people in ways that accord with “lay” procedural expectations, they are more likely to view the authorities as legitimate, to cooperate with them, and to obey the law out of an internalized sense of obligation. The article explores the moral significance of these empirical findings, arguing that it would be superficial to see them as a recipe for social stability. The deeper truth conveyed by the empirical research is that relating to people in ways that are widely perceived to be fair is a way for authorities to engage people's moral sentiments and to enliven their virtuous capacity to put aside considerations of self-interest so as to do what is right. This dynamic provides a sound moral foundation for courts to concern themselves with perceptions of justice.     

Rights and Resources—Libertarians and the Right to Life

The author addresses Robert Nozick's claim that: “The particular rights over things fill the space of rights, leaving no room for general rights to be in a certain material condition.” Hence Nozick insists that rights are violated if citizens are compelled to contribute to others' welfare, however urgent their needs may be. The author argues that it is characteristic of libertarian theories that they invoke the moral sanctity of private property against welfarist or egalitarian conceptions of social justice. Nozick's version of the libertarian critique has three conceptual pillars–“right,”“thing” and “space.” On that basis Nozick claims that talk of welfare “rights” can be condemned on the plane of rights. This is true, Nozick maintains, even of “the right to life.” The author contends that this argument fails. It equivocates over the idea of “rights”; and it misconceives crucial features of property. Nozick deploys exclusive “domain rights,” whilst attacking “important‐interest rights.” His historical‐entitlement theory fails as a justification of private property. The author argues that, so far as material objects are concerned, private property institutions depend upon trespassory rules which do not impose morally binding obligations unless basic needs are catered for. Furthermore, private property institutions also comprise monetary resources to which the spatial metaphor of exclusive rights does not apply. Holdings vested in any particular person at any particular time are stamped, morally, with a mix of contestable and mutable property‐specific justice reasons. Hence it is fallacious to suppose that ownership rights together exhaust all normative space over “things.” The major objection to speaking of everyone's having a right to various things such as equality of opportunity, life, and so on, and enforcing this right, is that these “rights” require a substructure of things and materials and actions; and other people may have rights and entitlements over these. [≡] The particular rights over things fill the space of rights, leaving no room for general rights to be in a certain material condition. (Nozick 1974, 238)     

State Crimes of Previous Regimes: Knowledge, Accountability, and the Policing of the Past

The policy of lustration is set in the context of responses to abuses of power by previous regimes. Using examples from three recent forms of social reconstruction (in Latin America, the former communist states, and South Africa), the author reviews the “justice in transition” debate. How do societies going through democratization confront the human rights violations committed by the previous regime? Five aspects of this debate are reviewed: (1) truth: establishing and confronting the knowledge of what happened in the past; (2) justice: making offenders accountable for their past violations through three possible methods: punishment through the criminal law, compensation and restitution, and mass disqualification such as lustration; (3) impunity: giving amnesty to previous offenders; (4) expiation; and (5) reconciliation and reconstruction. A concluding discussion raises the implications of the subject for the study of time and social control.     

Is It the What or the How? The Roles of High‐Policing Tactics and Procedural Justice in Predicting Perceptions of Hostile Treatment: The Case of Security Checks at Ben‐Gurion Airport,Israel

What affects perceptions of hostile treatment by police, characterized by feelings such as humiliation and intimidation? Is it what the police do to the citizen, or is it about how they do it? The important effects of procedural justice are well documented in the policing literature. Yet, it is not clear how high‐policing tactics, coupled with procedural justice, affect one's sense of hostile treatment: is it the case that what the police do does not matter as long as they follow the principles of procedural justice, or do some invasive or unpleasant tactics produce negative emotions regardless of the amount of procedural justice displayed by the officer? In the present study we examine this question in the context of security checks at Ben‐Gurion Airport, Israel. Using a survey of 1,970 passengers, we find that the behavioral elements of procedural justice are an important antidote, mitigating the negative effects of four “extra” screening measures on the perceived hostility of the checks. At the same time, two security measures retain an independent and significant effect. We discuss the implications of our findings and hypothesize about the characteristics of policing practices that are less sensitive to procedural justice.     

Mobilizing the Law in China: "Informed Disenchantment" and the Development of Legal Consciousness

This article critically examines the development of legal consciousness among legal aid plaintiffs in Shanghai. It is based on 16 months of research at a large legal aid center and in‐depth interviews with 50 plaintiffs. Chinese legal aid plaintiffs come to the legal process with high expectations about the possibility of protecting their rights; however, they also have only a vague and imprecise knowledge of legal procedure and their actual codified rights. Through this process of legal mobilization, plaintiffs' legal consciousness changes in two separate dimensions: changes in one's feelings of efficacy and competency vis‐à‐vis the law, and changes in one's perception/evaluation of the legal system. Put another way, the first dimension is “How well can I work the law?” and the second is “How well does the law work?” In this study I observe positive changes in feelings of individual efficacy and competency that are combined with more negative evaluations/perceptions of the legal system in terms of its fairness and effectiveness. The positive feelings of efficacy and voice provided by the legal process encourage labor dispute plaintiffs in the post‐dispute period to plan new lawsuits and to help friends and relatives with their legal problems. Disenchantment with the promises of the legal system does not lead to despondency, but to more critical, informed action. This study provides new evidence on the nature of China's developing legal system with a focus on the social response to the state‐led “rule of law” project.     

The Continuing Problem of the Universal to Questions of Justice: A Feminist Reading of Lars von Trier’s <Emphasis Type="Italic">Dogville</Emphasis>

What are the terms of evaluation that seem relevant in deciding whether a film is feminist or anti-feminist? Which critical practices should be engaged in such an evaluation? In recent and contemporary critical feminist practices, feminist arguments are no longer based on a stable subject category of “woman” and there is no longer any particular methodology upon which feminist theorists rely. The category of “woman” has been revealed to be not an ahistorical, stable category but an effect of material and representational practices. Further, feminist methodologies have been concerned to contextualize the framing of the questions they ask, as well as their place in the methodologies they employ. In addition to the refusal of an essentialized female subject, feminists have called into question the idea that it is possible to produce a “feminist method” based on the standpoint of a female subjectivity, even where this subjectivity is admitted as a construct, arguing that this extrapolation to the general from a particular point of view produces political, and frequently racist, effects. In this essay, I consider Lars von Trier’s controversial film Dogville (2003) as a case study to explore the relation of practices of representation to questions of feminist justice. I argue that the film does a lot of good critical work in showing the ways in which certain practices of representation can be mobilized to produce a collectivity (or “sovereignty”) that is seen to emanate from “the people” and to thereby instantiate authority, while simultaneously disguising the material and political effects of its subjugation of “others.” However, in doing this work the film produces its own problematic construction of universality and particularity. Further, the film instrumentalises representations of sexual violence and subjection in order to prove its point, and as productive as these tactics are to illuminating questions of social justice, I argue that this representational practice produces effects that need to be read as anti-feminist.     

Advancing Competency Development: A White Paper for Pennsylvania

One of the fundamental purposes of Pennsylvania's juvenile justice system is to develop “competencies” in delinquent youth. But what does that mean? Why is it important? How is it done? The White Paper. originally published in 2005, attempted to answer those questions, articulating basic principles and identifying research‐supported practices for competency development, the least understood of the three balanced and restorative justice goals. Practitioners and policy makers in other states who are interested in helping juvenile offenders acquire the knowledge and skills they need to become productive, connected, and law‐abiding community members will find it directly relevant.     

What's So Special about Specialized Courts? The State and Social Change in Salt Lake City's Domestic Violence Court

The nationwide growth in specialized or problem‐solving courts, including drug courts, community courts, mental health courts, and domestic violence courts, among others, raises questions about the role of the state with respect to social change. According to social control theories of the state, especially theories of technocratic or rationalized justice, law is increasingly about efficiency, speed, and effectiveness. Specialized courts, however, take on a social problem approach to crime, seeking to address crime's “root causes” within the individual, the society, and the larger culture in ways more characteristic of social movements. Are specialized courts about social control or social change? This study examines state action in a specialized court in domestic violence in order to examine this question. I focus on a domestic violence court that arose in February 1997 and four years later employed full‐time judges, prosecuting and defense attorneys, and numerous other staff to handle all misdemeanor domestic violence cases in Salt Lake County, Utah. I ask how legal, political, and community officials justify the court and its operation in order to examine some important issues about the role of the state and social change. Ultimately, I suggest that my findings about the complementary roles of social control and social change within domestic violence courts have implications not only for critical theories of technocratic justice and for the battered women's movement but also for democratic theories of the state.     

Summonsing Criminal Desistance: Convicted Felons’ Perspectives on Jury Service

This exploratory study is the first to examine how convicted felons view the jury process and their role in that process. Data derived from interviews with former and prospective felon‐jurors in Maine, the only US jurisdiction that does not restrict a convicted felon's opportunity to serve as a juror, reveal that participants displayed an idealized view of jury service, stressing a commitment to serve conscientiously. Additionally, inclusion in the jury process affirmed their transitions from “offenders” to “nonoffenders.” In response, participants exhibited a sense of particularized self‐worth, emphasizing that negative experiences with the criminal justice system make one a more effective juror. In sum, this study suggests that among convicted felons, inclusion in the jury process may prompt conformity with the “ideal juror” role, facilitate prosocial identity shifts by mitigating the “felon” label, and help former offenders to find personal value.     

Meta-analysis and the rehabilitation of punishment

Do we know what “works” in the way of rehabilitative treatment in corrections? Not yet. Has the old “nothing works” literature been invalidated by new reviews of research claiming to show, through meta-analysis, that treatment really does work, at least when it is “appropriate?” Not likely. Would production of this knowledge enhance the ability of prison officials to do their job? Not ever. Their job, and their highest duty, is to administer justice, not treatment. Individualized treatment muddles the message of punishment, making it less principled and not necessarily more humane. A “confinement model” of imprisonment is proposed, which rejects rehabilitation as an official goal and yet allows for programs of work, education, and other activities within the mission of a prison.     

The ethics of maxima and minima combined with social justice as a form of public corruption prevention

In recent decades, corruption has become one of the main problems perceived by Spanish society. As a result, the country’s citizens are experiencing a high level of disenchantment with politics and a general loss of confidence in the way public institutions function. Although in the last few years more stringent laws have been brought in to speed up procedures and help pursue crimes of corruption, the fact of the matter is that they have done little to reduce these cases and so they are not enough to put an end to the problem. There is a strong likelihood that, if a positive morality and a strong mutual union between ethics and politics were in place, legal loopholes would not be used for individual profitmaking operations that make a mockery of justice and the common good. Because of this, and taking public ethics as a basis, this article will review and discuss Adela Cortina’s hermeneutic definitions “of maxima and minima” and Agustín Domingo Moratalla’s concept of “social justice” in order to suggest tools that can be applied in preventing and fighting against political corruption.