The US Pretrial System: Balancing Individual Rights and Public Interests

IF 6.9 1区 经济学 Q1 ECONOMICS Journal of Economic Perspectives Pub Date : 2021-11-04 DOI:10.1257/jep.35.4.49
Will Dobbie, Crystal S. Yang
{"title":"The US Pretrial System: Balancing Individual Rights and Public Interests","authors":"Will Dobbie, Crystal S. Yang","doi":"10.1257/jep.35.4.49","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we review a growing empirical literature on the effectiveness and fairness of the US pretrial system and discuss its policy implications. Despite the importance of this stage of the criminal legal process, researchers have only recently begun to explore how the pretrial system balances individual rights and public interests. We describe the empirical challenges that have prevented progress in this area and how recent work has made use of new data sources and quasi-experimental approaches to credibly estimate both the individual harms (such as loss of employment or government assistance) and public benefits (such as preventing non-appearance at court and new crimes) of cash bail and pretrial detention. These new data and approaches show that the current pretrial system imposes substantial short-and long-term economic harms on detained defendants in terms of lost earnings and government assistance, while providing little in the way of decreased criminal activity for the public interest. Non-appearances at court do significantly decrease for detained defendants, but the magnitudes cannot justify the economic harms to individuals observed in the data. A second set of studies shows that that the costs of cash bail and pretrial detention are disproportionately borne by Black and Hispanic individuals, giving rise to large and unfair racial differences in cash bail and detention that cannot be explained by underlying differences in pretrial misconduct risk. We then turn to policy implications and describe areas of future work that would enable a deeper understanding of what drives these undesirable outcomes.","PeriodicalId":15611,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Perspectives","volume":" 61","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.35.4.49","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, we review a growing empirical literature on the effectiveness and fairness of the US pretrial system and discuss its policy implications. Despite the importance of this stage of the criminal legal process, researchers have only recently begun to explore how the pretrial system balances individual rights and public interests. We describe the empirical challenges that have prevented progress in this area and how recent work has made use of new data sources and quasi-experimental approaches to credibly estimate both the individual harms (such as loss of employment or government assistance) and public benefits (such as preventing non-appearance at court and new crimes) of cash bail and pretrial detention. These new data and approaches show that the current pretrial system imposes substantial short-and long-term economic harms on detained defendants in terms of lost earnings and government assistance, while providing little in the way of decreased criminal activity for the public interest. Non-appearances at court do significantly decrease for detained defendants, but the magnitudes cannot justify the economic harms to individuals observed in the data. A second set of studies shows that that the costs of cash bail and pretrial detention are disproportionately borne by Black and Hispanic individuals, giving rise to large and unfair racial differences in cash bail and detention that cannot be explained by underlying differences in pretrial misconduct risk. We then turn to policy implications and describe areas of future work that would enable a deeper understanding of what drives these undesirable outcomes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国审前制度:平衡个人权利与公共利益
在本文中,我们回顾了越来越多的关于美国审前制度的有效性和公平性的实证文献,并讨论了其政策含义。尽管刑事法律程序的这一阶段很重要,但研究人员直到最近才开始探索审前制度如何平衡个人权利和公共利益。我们描述了阻碍这一领域进展的经验挑战,以及最近的工作如何利用新的数据来源和准实验方法来可靠地估计现金保释和审前拘留的个人伤害(如失业或政府援助的损失)和公共利益(如防止不出庭和新的犯罪)。这些新的数据和方法表明,目前的审前制度在收入损失和政府援助方面对被拘留的被告造成了重大的短期和长期经济损害,而在减少公共利益的犯罪活动方面却收效甚微。被拘留的被告不出庭的情况确实显著减少,但其幅度不能证明数据中观察到的对个人的经济损害是合理的。第二组研究表明,现金保释和审前拘留的费用不成比例地由黑人和西班牙裔个人承担,造成了现金保释和拘留方面的巨大和不公平的种族差异,这无法用审前不当行为风险的潜在差异来解释。然后,我们转向政策影响,并描述未来工作的领域,以便更深入地了解驱动这些不良结果的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: The Journal of Economic Perspectives (JEP) bridges the gap between general interest press and typical academic economics journals. It aims to publish articles that synthesize economic research, analyze public policy issues, encourage interdisciplinary thinking, and offer accessible insights into state-of-the-art economic concepts. The journal also serves to suggest future research directions, provide materials for classroom use, and address issues within the economics profession. Articles are typically solicited by editors and associate editors, and proposals for topics and authors can be directed to the journal office.
期刊最新文献
The Evolution of Work from Home The Economics of Electricity Reliability The Economics Profession’s Socioeconomic Diversity Problem Why Did the Best Prepared Country in the World Fare So Poorly during COVID? Recommendations for Further Reading
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1