福利禁毒与刑事法律循环

IF 4.4 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY American Journal of Sociology Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1086/725424
Naomi F Sugie, Carol Newark
{"title":"福利禁毒与刑事法律循环","authors":"Naomi F Sugie, Carol Newark","doi":"10.1086/725424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Punitive policies of welfare and criminal legal systems reflect a shared orientation governing social marginality. The welfare drug bans, which prohibit people convicted of drug-related felonies from receiving cash assistance and food stamps, are a key example of increasing synergies between the two systems. In this article, we examine whether the bans increase recidivism by leveraging a methodologically rigorous approach using administrative data from California to compare rearrest rates among people convicted before and after the bans. We find that the cash assistance ban has no measurable impact on recidivism, but the food stamps ban hastens time to arrest, particularly in counties with more accessible policies and more generous benefits. We also find differences in the bans” effects by gender and race/ethnicity, with consequences concentrated among non-Hispanic White and Black men. The findings underscore the importance of inclusive welfare systems for protecting against repeat contact with the criminal legal system.","PeriodicalId":7658,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Sociology","volume":"129 1","pages":"41 - 75"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Welfare Drug Bans and Criminal Legal Cycling\",\"authors\":\"Naomi F Sugie, Carol Newark\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/725424\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Punitive policies of welfare and criminal legal systems reflect a shared orientation governing social marginality. The welfare drug bans, which prohibit people convicted of drug-related felonies from receiving cash assistance and food stamps, are a key example of increasing synergies between the two systems. In this article, we examine whether the bans increase recidivism by leveraging a methodologically rigorous approach using administrative data from California to compare rearrest rates among people convicted before and after the bans. We find that the cash assistance ban has no measurable impact on recidivism, but the food stamps ban hastens time to arrest, particularly in counties with more accessible policies and more generous benefits. We also find differences in the bans” effects by gender and race/ethnicity, with consequences concentrated among non-Hispanic White and Black men. The findings underscore the importance of inclusive welfare systems for protecting against repeat contact with the criminal legal system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7658,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Sociology\",\"volume\":\"129 1\",\"pages\":\"41 - 75\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/725424\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725424","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

福利惩罚政策和刑事法律制度反映了治理社会边缘化的共同方向。福利性毒品禁令禁止被判犯有毒品重罪的人获得现金援助和食品券,这是两个系统之间日益协同作用的一个关键例子。在这篇文章中,我们利用加州的行政数据,通过比较禁令前后被定罪者的重新逮捕率,研究禁令是否会增加累犯。我们发现,现金援助禁令对累犯没有可衡量的影响,但食品券禁令加快了逮捕时间,尤其是在政策更容易获得、福利更慷慨的县。我们还发现,禁令的影响因性别和种族/民族而异,其影响集中在非西班牙裔白人和黑人男性中。调查结果强调了包容性福利制度对防止再次接触刑事法律制度的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Welfare Drug Bans and Criminal Legal Cycling
Punitive policies of welfare and criminal legal systems reflect a shared orientation governing social marginality. The welfare drug bans, which prohibit people convicted of drug-related felonies from receiving cash assistance and food stamps, are a key example of increasing synergies between the two systems. In this article, we examine whether the bans increase recidivism by leveraging a methodologically rigorous approach using administrative data from California to compare rearrest rates among people convicted before and after the bans. We find that the cash assistance ban has no measurable impact on recidivism, but the food stamps ban hastens time to arrest, particularly in counties with more accessible policies and more generous benefits. We also find differences in the bans” effects by gender and race/ethnicity, with consequences concentrated among non-Hispanic White and Black men. The findings underscore the importance of inclusive welfare systems for protecting against repeat contact with the criminal legal system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.30%
发文量
103
期刊介绍: Established in 1895 as the first US scholarly journal in its field, the American Journal of Sociology (AJS) presents pathbreaking work from all areas of sociology, with an emphasis on theory building and innovative methods. AJS strives to speak to the general sociology reader and is open to contributions from across the social sciences—sociology, political science, economics, history, anthropology, and statistics—that seriously engage the sociological literature to forge new ways of understanding the social. AJS offers a substantial book review section that identifies the most salient work of both emerging and enduring scholars of social science. Commissioned review essays appear occasionally, offering readers a comparative, in-depth examination of prominent titles. Although AJS publishes a very small percentage of the papers submitted to it, a double-blind review process is available to all qualified submissions, making the journal a center for exchange and debate "behind" the printed page and contributing to the robustness of social science research in general.
期刊最新文献
Genetic Options and Constraints: A Randomized Controlled Trial on How Genetic Ancestry Tests Affect Ethnic and Racial Identities Identities and Interactions: Reentry and Reintegration after Incarceration for Genocide Family Tree Branches and Southern Roots: Contemporary Racial Differences in Marriage in Intergenerational and Contextual Perspective A Very Uneven Playing Field: Economic Mobility in the United States Lowering their Meritocratic Blinders: White Men’s Harassment Experiences and their Recognition and Reporting of Workplace Race and Gender Bias
×
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