TableofContents

TitlePageDedicationAcknowledgementsPrefaceIntroduction

Chapter1-TheRebirthofCasteTheBirthofSlaveryTheDeathofSlaveryTheBirthofJimCrowTheDeathofJimCrowTheBirthofMassIncarceration

Chapter2-TheLockdownRulesoftheGameUnreasonableSuspicionJustSayNoPoorExcuseKissingFrogsItPaystoPlayWagingWarFindersKeepersTheShakedownLegalMisrepresentationBadDealTimeServedThePrisonLabel

Chapter3-TheColorofJusticePickingandChoosing—TheRoleofDiscretionClosingtheCourthouseDoors—McCleskeyv.KempCrackedUp—DiscriminatorySentencingintheWaronDrugsChargingAhead—Armstrongv.UnitedStatesInDefenseoftheAll-WhiteJury—Purkettv.ElmTheOccupation—PolicingtheEnemyUnconventionalWisdomHollowHopeRaceasaFactorTheEndofanEra

Chapter4-TheCruelHandBraveNewWorld

NoPlaceLikeHomeBoxedInTheBlackBoxDebtor’sPrisonLetThemEatCakeTheSilentMinorityThePariahsEerieSilencePassing(Redux)GangstaLoveTheMinstrelShowTheAntidote

Chapter5-TheNewJimCrowStatesofDenialHowItWorksNothingNew?MappingtheParallelsTheLimitsoftheAnalogy

Chapter6-TheFireThisTimeRethinkingDenial—Or,WhereAreCivilRightsAdvocatesWhenYouNeedThem?TinkeringIsforMechanics,NotRacialJusticeAdvocatesLet’sTalkAboutRace—ResistingtheTemptationofColorblindAdvocacyAgainstColorblindnessTheRacialBribe—Let’sGiveItBackObama—thePromiseandthePerilAllofUsorNone

NotesIndexCopyrightPage

ForNicole,Jonathan,andCorinne

Acknowledgments

Itisoftensaid,“Ittakesavillagetoraiseachild.”Inmycase,ithastakenavillagetowritethisbook.Igavebirthtothreechildreninfouryears,andinthemiddleofthisburstofjoyousactivityinourhome,Idecidedtowrite thisbook.Itwaswrittenwhilefeedingbabiesandduringnaptimes.ItwaswrittenatoddhoursandoftenwhenI(andeveryoneelseinthehousehold)hadlittlesleep.Quittingtheendeavorwastempting,aswritingthebookprovedfarmorechallengingthanIexpected.ButjustwhenIfeltitwastoomuchortoohard,someoneIlovedwouldsurprisemewithgenerosityandunconditionalsupport;andjustwhenIstartedtobelievethebookwasnotworththeeffort,Iwouldreceive—outoftheblue—aletterfromsomeonebehindbarswhowouldremindmeofallthereasonsthatIcouldnotpossiblyquit,andhowfortunate Iwas to be sitting in the comfort ofmy home ormy office, rather than in a prison cell.Mycolleaguesandpublishersupportedthiseffort, too,inwaysthatfarexceededthecallofduty.Iwanttobegin,then,byacknowledgingthosepeoplewhomadesureIdidnotgiveup—thepeoplewhomadesurethisimportantstorygottold.FirstonthislistisNancyRogers,whowasdeanoftheMoritzCollegeofLawatOhioStateUniversity

until 2008. Nancy exemplifies outstanding leadership. I will always remember her steadfastencouragement,support,andflexibility,asIlaboredtojugglemycommitmentstoworkandfamily.Thankyou,Nancy,foryourfaithinme.Inthisregard,Ialsowanttothankjohnpowell,directoroftheKirwanInstitutefortheStudyofRaceandEthnicity.HeimmediatelyunderstoodwhatIhopedtoaccomplishwiththisbookandprovidedcriticalinstitutionalsupport.Myhusband,CarterStewart,hasbeenmyrock.Withouteveronceutteringawordofcomplaint,hehas

readandrereaddraftsandrearrangedhisschedulecountlesstimestocareforourchildren,sothatIcouldmakeprogresswithmywriting.Asafederalprosecutor,hedoesnotsharemyviewsaboutthecriminaljustice system, but his different worldview has not, even for a moment, compromised his ability tosupportme,lovingly,ateveryturninmyeffortstosharemytruth.ImadethebestdecisionofmylifewhenImarriedhim.Mymotherandsister,too,havebeenblessingsinmylife.DeterminedtoensurethatIactuallyfinished

thisbook,theyhaveexhaustedthemselveschasingafterthelittlepeopleinmyhome,whoarebundlesofjoy(andmorethanalittletiring).Theirloveandgoodhumorhavebeenfoodformysoul.SpecialthanksisalsoowedNicoleHanft,whoselovingkindnessincaringforourchildrenwillforeverbeappreciated.IdeeplyregretthatImayneverbeabletothank,inperson,TimothyDemetriusJohnson,TawanChilds,

JacobMcNary,TimothyAnderson,andLarryBrown-Austin,whoarecurrentlyincarcerated.Theirkindletters and expressions of gratitude for my work motivated me more than they could possibly know,remindingmethatIcouldnotrestuntilthisbookwasdone.IamalsogratefulforthesupportoftheOpenSocietyInstituteoftheSorosFoundation,aswellasfor

thegenerosityof themanypeoplewhohavereviewedandcommentedonportionsof themanuscriptorcontributed to it in someway, includingSharonDavies,AndrewGrant-Thomas,EavonMobley,MarcMauer,ElaineElinson,JohannaWu,SteveMenendian,HiramJoséIrizarryOsorio,RuthPeterson,HasanJeffries, ShaunaMarshall, and TobiasWolff.My dear friendMayaHarris is owed special thanks forreadingmultipledraftsofvariouschapters,nevertiringoftherevisionprocess.Luckyforme,mysister,LeslieAlexander,isanAfricanAmericanhistoryscholar,soIbenefitedfromherknowledgeandcriticalperspectiveregardingournation’sracialhistory.Anyerrorsinfactorjudgmentareentirelymyown,ofcourse.Ialsowanttoexpressmyappreciationtomyoutstandingeditorandpublisher,DianeWachtellofTheNewPress,whobelievedinthisbookbeforeIhadevenwrittenaword(andwaitedverypatientlyforthefinalwordtobewritten).

Anumberofmyformerstudentshavemade importantcontributions to thisbook, includingGuylandoMoreno, Monica Ramirez, Stephanie Beckstrom, Lacy Sales, Yolanda Miller, Rashida Edmonson,TanishaWilburn,RyanKing,AllisonLammers,DannyGoldman,StephenKane,AnuMenon,andLenzaMcElrath.Manyofthemworkedwithoutpay,simplywantingtocontributetothiseffortinsomeway.IcannotclosewithoutacknowledgingtheinvaluablegiftsIreceivedfrommyparents,whoultimately

madethisbookpossiblebyraisingme.Iinheriteddeterminationfrommymother,whoastoundsmewithherabilitytoovercomeextraordinaryobstaclesandmeeteachdaywithfreshoptimism.Iowemyvisionforsocialjusticetomyfather,whowasadreamerandneverceasedtochallengemetoprobedeeper,forgreatertruth.Iwishhewerestillalivetoseethisbook;thoughIsuspectheknowssomethingofitstill.Thisbookisforyou,too,Dad.Mayyourestinpeace.

Preface

Thisbookisnotforeveryone.Ihaveaspecificaudienceinmind—peoplewhocaredeeplyaboutracialjusticebutwho, for anynumberof reasons, donot yet appreciate themagnitudeof the crisis facedbycommunitiesofcolorasaresultofmassincarceration.Inotherwords,Iamwritingthisbookforpeoplelikeme—thepersonIwastenyearsago.Iamalsowritingitforanotheraudience—thosewhohavebeenstruggling to persuade their friends, neighbors, relatives, teachers, co-workers, or politicalrepresentatives that something is eerily familiar about the way our criminal justice system operates,somethingthatlooksandfeelsalotlikeanerawesupposedlyleftbehind,buthavelackedthefactsanddata tobackup theirclaims. It ismyhopeandprayer that thisbookempowersyouandallowsyou tospeak your truth with greater conviction, credibility, and courage. Last, but definitely not least, I amwriting thisbook for all those trappedwithinAmerica’s latest caste system.Youmaybe lockeduporlockedoutofmainstreamsociety,butyouarenotforgotten.

Introduction

JarviousCottoncannotvote.Likehisfather,grandfather,great-grandfather,andgreat-great-grandfather,hehasbeendeniedtherighttoparticipateinourelectoraldemocracy.Cotton’sfamilytreetellsthestoryofseveralgenerationsofblackmenwhowerebornintheUnitedStatesbutwhoweredeniedthemostbasicfreedomthatdemocracypromises—thefreedomtovoteforthosewhowillmaketherulesandlawsthatgovernone’s life.Cotton’sgreat-great-grandfathercouldnotvoteasaslave.Hisgreat-grandfatherwasbeatentodeathbytheKuKluxKlanforattemptingtovote.HisgrandfatherwaspreventedfromvotingbyKlan intimidation.His fatherwas barred fromvoting by poll taxes and literacy tests. Today, JarviousCottoncannotvotebecausehe,likemanyblackmenintheUnitedStates,hasbeenlabeledafelonandiscurrentlyonparole.1Cotton’s story illustrates, in many respects, the old adage “The more things change, the more they

remain thesame.” Ineachgeneration,new tacticshavebeenused forachieving thesamegoals—goalsshared by the Founding Fathers. Denying African Americans citizenship was deemed essential to theformationof theoriginalunion.Hundredsofyears later,America is stillnotanegalitariandemocracy.The arguments and rationalizations that have been trotted out in support of racial exclusion anddiscriminationinitsvariousformshavechangedandevolved,buttheoutcomehasremainedlargelythesame.AnextraordinarypercentageofblackmenintheUnitedStatesarelegallybarredfromvotingtoday,just as they have been throughout most of American history. They are also subject to legalizeddiscriminationinemployment,housing,education,publicbenefits,andjuryservice,justastheirparents,grandparents,andgreat-grandparentsoncewere.WhathaschangedsincethecollapseofJimCrowhaslesstodowiththebasicstructureofoursociety

thanwiththelanguageweusetojustifyit.Intheeraofcolorblindness,itisnolongersociallypermissibletouserace,explicitly,asajustificationfordiscrimination,exclusion,andsocialcontempt.Sowedon’t.Ratherthanrelyonrace,weuseourcriminaljusticesystemtolabelpeopleofcolor“criminals”andthenengageinallthepracticeswesupposedlyleftbehind.Todayitisperfectlylegaltodiscriminateagainstcriminalsinnearlyall thewaysthatitwasoncelegaltodiscriminateagainstAfricanAmericans.Onceyou’re labeled a felon, the old forms of discrimination—employment discrimination, housingdiscrimination,denialof the right tovote,denialofeducationalopportunity,denialof foodstampsandother public benefits, and exclusion from jury service—are suddenly legal. As a criminal, you havescarcelymorerights,andarguablylessrespect,thanablackmanlivinginAlabamaattheheightofJimCrow.WehavenotendedracialcasteinAmerica;wehavemerelyredesignedit.

I reached the conclusions presented in this book reluctantly. Ten years ago, I would have arguedstrenuously against the central claimmade here—namely, that something akin to a racial caste systemcurrently exists in theUnitedStates. Indeed, ifBarackObamahad been elected president back then, Iwouldhavearguedthathiselectionmarkedthenation’s triumphoverracialcaste—thefinalnail in thecoffinofJimCrow.MyelationwouldhavebeentemperedbythedistanceyettobetraveledtoreachthepromisedlandofracialjusticeinAmerica,butmyconvictionthatnothingremotelysimilartoJimCrowexistsinthiscountrywouldhavebeensteadfast.TodaymyelationoverObama’selectionistemperedbyafarmoresoberingawareness.AsanAfrican

Americanwoman,withthreeyoungchildrenwhowillneverknowaworldinwhichablackmancouldnotbepresidentoftheUnitedStates,Iwasbeyondthrilledonelectionnight.YetwhenIwalkedoutoftheelectionnightparty,fullofhopeandenthusiasm,IwasimmediatelyremindedoftheharshrealitiesoftheNew JimCrow.Ablackmanwasonhis knees in thegutter, hands cuffedbehindhis back, as several

policeofficersstoodaroundhimtalking,joking,andignoringhishumanexistence.Peoplepouredoutofthebuilding;many stared for amoment at theblackmancowering in the street, and then averted theirgaze.WhatdidtheelectionofBarackObamameanforhim?Likemanycivilrightslawyers,Iwasinspiredtoattendlawschoolbythecivilrightsvictoriesofthe

1950sand1960s.Eveninthefaceofgrowingsocialandpoliticaloppositiontoremedialpoliciessuchasaffirmativeaction,IclungtothenotionthattheevilsofJimCrowarebehindusandthat,whilewehavealongwaytogotofulfillthedreamofanegalitarian,multiracialdemocracy,wehavemaderealprogressandarenowstrugglingtoholdontothegainsofthepast.IthoughtmyjobasacivilrightslawyerwastojoinwiththealliesofracialprogresstoresistattacksonaffirmativeactionandtoeliminatethevestigesofJimCrowsegregation,includingourstillseparateandunequalsystemofeducation.Iunderstoodtheproblems plaguing poor communities of color, including problems associated with crime and risingincarceration rates, tobea functionofpovertyand lackofaccess toqualityeducation—thecontinuinglegacyof slaveryandJimCrow.Neverdid I seriouslyconsider thepossibility thatanewracialcastesystemwasoperatinginthiscountry.Thenewsystemhadbeendevelopedandimplementedswiftly,anditwaslargelyinvisible,eventopeople,likeme,whospentmostoftheirwakinghoursfightingforjustice.Ifirstencounteredtheideaofanewracialcastesystemmorethanadecadeago,whenabrightorange

postercaughtmyeye.Iwasrushingtocatchthebus,andInoticedasignstapledtoatelephonepolethatscreamedinlargeboldprint:THEDRUGWARISTHENEWJIMCROW.Ipausedforamomentandskimmedthetextoftheflyer.Someradicalgroupwasholdingacommunitymeetingaboutpolicebrutality,thenewthree-strikeslawinCalifornia,andtheexpansionofAmerica’sprisonsystem.Themeetingwasbeingheldatasmallcommunitychurchafewblocksaway;ithadseatingcapacityfornomorethanfiftypeople. I sighed, andmuttered tomyself something like, “Yeah, the criminal justice system is racist inmanyways,butitreallydoesn’thelptomakesuchanabsurdcomparison.Peoplewilljustthinkyou’recrazy.”Ithencrossedthestreetandhoppedonthebus.Iwasheadedtomynewjob,directoroftheRacialJusticeProjectoftheAmericanCivilLibertiesUnion(ACLU)inNorthernCalifornia.WhenIbeganmyworkattheACLU,Iassumedthatthecriminaljusticesystemhadproblemsofracial

bias,muchinthesamewaythatallmajorinstitutionsinoursocietyareplaguedwithproblemsassociatedwithconsciousandunconsciousbias.Asalawyerwhohadlitigatednumerousclass-actionemployment-discrimination cases, I understood well the many ways in which racial stereotyping can permeatesubjectivedecision-makingprocessesatall levelsofanorganization,withdevastatingconsequences. Iwas familiarwith the challenges associatedwith reforming institutions inwhich racial stratification isthoughttobenormal—thenaturalconsequenceofdifferencesineducation,culture,motivation,and,somestill believe, innate ability.While at theACLU, I shiftedmy focus fromemployment discrimination tocriminaljusticereformanddedicatedmyselftothetaskofworkingwithotherstoidentifyandeliminateracialbiaswheneverandwhereveritreareditsuglyhead.BythetimeIlefttheACLU,IhadcometosuspectthatIwaswrongaboutthecriminaljusticesystem.It

wasnotjustanotherinstitutioninfectedwithracialbiasbutratheradifferentbeastentirely.Theactivistswho posted the sign on the telephone pole were not crazy; nor were the smattering of lawyers andadvocatesaroundthecountrywhowerebeginningtoconnectthedotsbetweenourcurrentsystemofmassincarcerationandearlierformsofsocialcontrol.Quitebelatedly,Icametoseethatmassincarcerationinthe United States had, in fact, emerged as a stunningly comprehensive and well-disguised system ofracializedsocialcontrolthatfunctionsinamannerstrikinglysimilartoJimCrow.Inmyexperience,peoplewhohavebeen incarcerated rarelyhavedifficulty identifying theparallels

betweenthesesystemsofsocialcontrol.Oncetheyarereleased,theyareoftendeniedtherighttovote,excludedfromjuries,andrelegatedtoaraciallysegregatedandsubordinatedexistence.Throughaweboflaws,regulations,andinformalrules,allofwhicharepowerfullyreinforcedbysocialstigma, theyareconfined to themarginsofmainstreamsocietyanddeniedaccess to themainstreameconomy.Theyare

legally denied the ability to obtain employment, housing, and public benefits—much as AfricanAmericanswereonceforcedintoasegregated,second-classcitizenshipintheJimCrowera.Thoseofuswhohaveviewedthatworldfromacomfortabledistance—yetsympathizewiththeplight

of the so-calledunderclass—tend to interpret the experience of those caught up in the criminal justicesystem primarily through the lens of popularized social science, attributing the staggering increase inincarceration rates in communities of color to the predictable, though unfortunate, consequences ofpoverty, racial segregation, unequal educational opportunities, and the presumed realities of the drugmarket, including themistaken belief thatmost drug dealers are black or brown.Occasionally, in thecourseofmywork,someonewouldmakearemarksuggestingthatperhapstheWaronDrugsisaracistconspiracytoputblacksbackintheirplace.Thistypeofremarkwasinvariablyaccompaniedbynervouslaughter,intendedtoconveytheimpressionthatalthoughtheideahadcrossedtheirminds,itwasnotanideaareasonablepersonwouldtakeseriously.MostpeopleassumetheWaronDrugswaslaunchedinresponsetothecrisiscausedbycrackcocaine

ininner-cityneighborhoods.Thisviewholdsthattheracialdisparitiesindrugconvictionsandsentences,as well as the rapid explosion of the prison population, reflect nothing more than the government’szealous—butbenign—effortstoaddressrampantdrugcrimeinpoor,minorityneighborhoods.Thisview,whileunderstandable,giventhesensationalmediacoverageofcrackinthe1980sand1990s,issimplywrong.Whileitistruethatthepublicitysurroundingcrackcocaineledtoadramaticincreaseinfundingforthe

drugwar (aswell as to sentencing policies that greatly exacerbated racial disparities in incarcerationrates), there isno truth to thenotion that theWaronDrugswas launched inresponse tocrackcocaine.PresidentRonaldReaganofficiallyannouncedthecurrentdrugwarin1982,beforecrackbecameanissueinthemediaoracrisisinpoorblackneighborhoods.Afewyearsafterthedrugwarwasdeclared,crackbegan to spread rapidly in the poor black neighborhoods of Los Angeles and later emerged in citiesacrossthecountry.2TheReaganadministrationhiredstafftopublicizetheemergenceofcrackcocainein1985aspartofastrategicefforttobuildpublicandlegislativesupportforthewar.3Themediacampaignwas an extraordinary success.Almost overnight, themediawas saturatedwith imagesofblack “crackwhores,”“crackdealers,”and“crackbabies”—imagesthatseemedtoconfirmtheworstnegativeracialstereotypes about impoverished inner-city residents. Themedia bonanza surrounding the “new demondrug”helpedtocatapulttheWaronDrugsfromanambitiousfederalpolicytoanactualwar.Thetimingofthecrackcrisishelpedtofuelconspiracytheoriesandgeneralspeculationinpoorblack

communities that theWar on Drugs was part of a genocidal plan by the government to destroy blackpeople in theUnitedStates.From theoutset, stories circulatedon the street that crackandotherdrugswerebeingbroughtintoblackneighborhoodsbytheCIA.Eventually,eventheUrbanLeaguecametotaketheclaimsofgenocideseriously.Inits1990report“TheStateofBlackAmerica,”itstated:“Thereisatleastoneconceptthatmustberecognizedifoneistoseethepervasiveandinsidiousnatureofthedrugproblem for the African American community. Though difficult to accept, that is the concept ofgenocide.”4Whiletheconspiracytheorieswereinitiallydismissedasfar-fetched,ifnotdownrightloony,thewordonthestreet turnedout toberight,at least toapoint.TheCIAadmittedin1998thatguerillaarmiesitactivelysupportedinNicaraguaweresmugglingillegaldrugsintotheUnitedStates—drugsthatweremaking theirwayonto thestreetsof inner-cityblackneighborhoods in theformofcrackcocaine.The CIA also admitted that, in the midst of theWar on Drugs, it blocked law enforcement efforts toinvestigateillegaldrugnetworksthatwerehelpingtofunditscovertwarinNicaragua.5It bears emphasis that the CIA never admitted (nor has any evidence been revealed to support the

claim)thatitintentionallysoughtthedestructionoftheblackcommunitybyallowingillegaldrugstobesmuggledintotheUnitedStates.Nonetheless,conspiracytheoristssurelymustbeforgivenfortheirbold

accusationofgenocide,inlightofthedevastationwroughtbycrackcocaineandthedrugwar,andtheoddcoincidence that an illegaldrugcrisis suddenly appeared in theblackcommunity after—notbefore—adrugwarhadbeendeclared.Infact,theWaronDrugsbeganatatimewhenillegaldrugusewasonthedecline.6Duringthissametimeperiod,however,awarwasdeclared,causingarrestsandconvictionsfordrugoffensestoskyrocket,especiallyamongpeopleofcolor.The impact of the drugwar has been astounding. In less than thirty years, theU.S penal population

explodedfromaround300,000tomorethan2million,withdrugconvictionsaccountingforthemajorityoftheincrease.7TheUnitedStatesnowhas thehighest rateof incarceration in theworld,dwarfing theratesofnearlyeverydevelopedcountry,evensurpassingthoseinhighlyrepressiveregimeslikeRussia,China,andIran.InGermany,93peopleareinprisonforevery100,000adultsandchildren.IntheUnitedStates,therateisroughlyeighttimesthat,or750per100,000.8Theracialdimensionofmassincarcerationisitsmoststrikingfeature.Noothercountryintheworld

imprisonssomanyofitsracialorethnicminorities.TheUnitedStatesimprisonsalargerpercentageofitsblack population than South Africa did at the height of apartheid. In Washington, D.C., our nation’scapitol, it is estimated that three out of four young black men (and nearly all those in the poorestneighborhoods)canexpecttoservetimeinprison.9SimilarratesofincarcerationcanbefoundinblackcommunitiesacrossAmerica.Thesestarkracialdisparitiescannotbeexplainedbyratesofdrugcrime.Studiesshowthatpeopleof

allcolorsuseandsellillegaldrugsatremarkablysimilarrates.10Iftherearesignificantdifferencesinthesurveys to be found, they frequently suggest that whites, particularly white youth, are more likely toengageindrugcrimethanpeopleofcolor.11Thatisnotwhatonewouldguess,however,whenenteringour nation’s prisons and jails, which are overflowing with black and brown drug offenders. In somestates,blackmenhavebeenadmittedtoprisonondrugchargesatratestwentytofiftytimesgreaterthanthose ofwhitemen.12 And inmajor citieswracked by the drugwar, asmany as 80 percent of youngAfricanAmericanmennowhavecriminalrecordsandarethussubjecttolegalizeddiscriminationfortherestoftheirlives.13Theseyoungmenarepartofagrowingundercaste,permanentlylockedupandlockedoutofmainstreamsociety.

Itmaybesurprisingtosomethatdrugcrimewasdeclining,notrising,whenadrugwarwasdeclared.Fromahistoricalperspective,however,thelackofcorrelationbetweencrimeandpunishmentisnothingnew.Sociologistshavefrequentlyobservedthatgovernmentsusepunishmentprimarilyasatoolofsocialcontrol,andthustheextentorseverityofpunishmentisoftenunrelatedtoactualcrimepatterns.MichaelTonry explains inThinkingAboutCrime: “Governments decide howmuch punishment theywant, andthesedecisionsareinnosimplewayrelatedtocrimerates.”14Thisfact,hepointsout,canbeseenmostclearlybyputtingcrimeandpunishmentincomparativeperspective.AlthoughcrimeratesintheUnitedStateshavenotbeenmarkedlyhigherthanthoseofotherWesterncountries,therateofincarcerationhassoaredintheUnitedStateswhileithasremainedstableordeclinedinothercountries.Between1960and1990,forexample,officialcrimeratesinFinland,Germany,andtheUnitedStateswereclosetoidentical.YettheU.S.incarcerationratequadrupled,theFinnishratefellby60percent,andtheGermanratewasstableinthatperiod.15Despitesimilarcrimerates,eachgovernmentchosetoimposedifferentlevelsofpunishment.Today, due to recent declines, U.S. crime rates have dipped below the international norm.

Nevertheless,theUnitedStatesnowboastsanincarcerationratethatissixtotentimesgreaterthanthatofotherindustrializednations16—adevelopmentdirectlytraceabletothedrugwar.TheonlycountryintheworldthatevencomesclosetotheAmericanrateofincarcerationisRussia,andnoothercountryintheworldincarceratessuchanastonishingpercentageofitsracialorethnicminorities.

Thestarkandsoberingrealityisthat,forreasonslargelyunrelatedtoactualcrimetrends,theAmericanpenalsystemhasemergedasasystemofsocialcontrolunparalleledinworldhistory.AndwhilethesizeofthesystemalonemightsuggestthatitwouldtouchthelivesofmostAmericans,theprimarytargetsofitscontrolcanbedefined largelybyrace.This isanastonishingdevelopment,especiallygiven thatasrecentlyasthemid-1970s,themostwell-respectedcriminologistswerepredictingthattheprisonsystemwouldsoonfadeaway.Prisondidnotdetercrimesignificantly,manyexpertsconcluded.Thosewhohadmeaningfuleconomicandsocialopportunitieswereunlikelytocommitcrimesregardlessofthepenalty,whilethosewhowenttoprisonwerefarmorelikelytocommitcrimesagaininthefuture.ThegrowingconsensusamongexpertswasperhapsbestreflectedbytheNationalAdvisoryCommissiononCriminalJusticeStandardsandGoals,whichissuedarecommendationin1973that“nonewinstitutionsforadultsshould be built and existing institutions for juveniles should be closed.”17 This recommendation wasbasedontheirfindingthat“theprison,thereformatoryandthejailhaveachievedonlyashockingrecordoffailure.Thereisoverwhelmingevidencethattheseinstitutionscreatecrimeratherthanpreventit.”18Thesedays,activistswhoadvocate“aworldwithoutprisons”areoftendismissedasquacks,butonly

afewdecadesago,thenotionthatoursocietywouldbemuchbetteroffwithoutprisons—andthattheendofprisonswasmoreorlessinevitable—notonlydominatedmainstreamacademicdiscourseinthefieldof criminologybut also inspired a national campaignby reformers demanding amoratoriumonprisonconstruction. Marc Mauer, the executive director of the Sentencing Project, notes that what is mostremarkable about themoratoriumcampaign in retrospect is the context of imprisonment at the time. In1972,fewerthan350,000peoplewerebeingheldinprisonsandjailsnationwide,comparedwithmorethan2millionpeople today.The rateof incarceration in1972was at a level so low that it no longerseems in the realm of possibility, but formoratorium supporters, thatmagnitude of imprisonmentwasegregiously high. “Supporters of the moratorium effort can be forgiven for being so naïve,” Mauersuggests,“sincetheprisonexpansionthatwasabouttotakeplacewasunprecedentedinhumanhistory.”19Noone imagined that the prison populationwouldmore than quintuple in their lifetime. It seemed farmorelikelythatprisonswouldfadeaway.

Farfromfadingaway, itappears thatprisonsarehere tostay.Anddespite theunprecedented levelsofincarcerationintheAfricanAmericancommunity,thecivilrightscommunityisoddlyquiet.OneinthreeyoungAfricanAmericanmeniscurrentlyunderthecontrolofthecriminaljusticesystem—inprison,injail,onprobation,oronparole—yetmassincarcerationtendstobecategorizedasacriminaljusticeissueasopposedtoaracialjusticeorcivilrightsissue(orcrisis).The attention of civil rights advocates has been largely devoted to other issues, such as affirmative

action.Duringthepasttwentyyears,virtuallyeveryprogressive,nationalcivilrightsorganizationinthecountryhasmobilizedandrallied indefenseofaffirmativeaction.Thestruggle topreserveaffirmativeactioninhighereducation,andthusmaintaindiversityinthenation’smostelitecollegesanduniversities,has consumedmuch of the attention and resources of the civil rights community and dominated racialjusticediscourseinthemainstreammedia,leadingthegeneralpublictobelievethataffirmativeactionisthemainbattlefrontinU.S.racerelations—evenasourprisonsfillwithblackandbrownmen.My own experience reflects this dynamic.When I first joined theACLU, no one imagined that the

Racial JusticeProjectwould focus itsattentiononcriminal justice reform.TheACLUwasengaged inimportantcriminaljusticereformwork,butnoonesuspectedthatworkwouldeventuallybecomecentralto the agendaof theRacial JusticeProject.The assumptionwas that theprojectwould concentrate itseffortsondefendingaffirmativeaction.ShortlyafterleavingtheACLU,Ijoinedtheboardofdirectorsofthe Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area. Although the organizationincludedracialjusticeamongitscorepriorities,reformofthecriminaljusticesystemwasnot(andstillisnot)amajorpartofitsracialjusticework.TheLawyers’Committeeisnotalone.

In January 2008, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights—an organization composed of theleadershipofmorethan180civilrightsorganizations—sentalettertoitsalliesandsupportersinformingthemofamajorinitiativetodocumentthevotingrecordofmembersofCongress.Theletterexplainedthatitsforthcomingreportwouldshow“howeachrepresentativeandsenatorcasthisorhervoteonsomeofthemost important civil rights issues of 2007, including voting rights, affirmative action, immigration,nominations,education,hatecrimes,employment,health,housing,andpoverty.”Criminal justice issuesdidnotmake the list.Thatsamebroad-basedcoalitionorganizedamajorconference inOctober2007,entitledWhyWeCan’tWait:Reversing theRetreat onCivilRights,which included panels discussingschool integration, employment discrimination, housing and lending discrimination, economic justice,environmentaljustice,disabilityrights,agediscrimination,andimmigrants’rights.Notasinglepanelwasdevotedtocriminaljusticereform.TheelectedleadersoftheAfricanAmericancommunityhaveamuchbroadermandatethancivilrights

groups, but they, too, frequently overlook criminal justice. In January 2009, for example, theCongressionalBlackCaucussenta letter tohundredsofcommunityandorganization leaderswhohaveworkedwiththecaucusovertheyears,solicitinggeneralinformationaboutthemandrequestingthattheyidentify their priorities.More than thirty-five topicswere listed as areas of potential special interest,including taxes, defense, immigration, agriculture, housing, banking, higher education, multimedia,transportationandinfrastructure,women,seniors,nutrition,faithinitiatives,civilrights,census,economicsecurity, and emerging leaders.Nomentionwasmade of criminal justice. “Reentry”was listed, but acommunityleaderwhowasinterestedincriminaljusticereformhadtochecktheboxlabeled“other.”Thisisnottosaythatimportantcriminaljusticereformworkhasnotbeendone.Civilrightsadvocates

haveorganizedvigorouschallengestospecificaspectsofthenewcastesystem.OnenotableexampleisthesuccessfulchallengeledbytheNAACPLegalDefenseFundtoaracistdrugstingoperationinTulia,Texas.The1999drugbustincarceratedalmost15percentoftheblackpopulationofthetown,basedontheuncorroboratedfalsetestimonyofasingleinformanthiredbythesheriffofTulia.Morerecently,civilrights groups around the country have helped to launch legal attacks and vibrant grassroots campaignsagainst felon disenfranchisement laws and have strenuously opposed discriminatory crack sentencinglaws and guidelines, as well as “zero tolerance” policies that effectively funnel youth of color fromschools to jails.ThenationalACLUrecentlydevelopeda racial justiceprogramthat includescriminaljusticeissuesamongitscoreprioritiesandhascreatedapromisingDrugLawReformProject.AndthankstotheaggressiveadvocacyoftheACLU,NAACP,andothercivilrightsorganizationsaroundthecountry,racialprofilingiswidelycondemned,evenbymembersoflawenforcementwhoonceopenlyembracedthepractice.Still,despitethesesignificantdevelopments,thereseemstobealackofappreciationfortheenormity

of the crisis at hand. There is no broad-based movement brewing to end mass incarceration and noadvocacy effort that approaches in scale the fight topreserve affirmative action.There also remains apersistent tendency in the civil rights community to treat the criminal justice system as just anotherinstitutioninfectedwithlingeringracialbias.TheNAACP’sWebsiteoffersoneexample.AsrecentlyasMay2008,onecouldfindabrief introductiontotheorganization’scriminal justiceworkinthesectionentitledLegalDepartment.Theintroductionexplainedthat“despitethecivilrightsvictoriesofourpast,racialprejudicestillpervadesthecriminaljusticesystem.”VisitorstotheWebsitewereurgedtojointheNAACPinorderto“protectthehard-earnedcivilrightsgainsofthepastthreedecades.”NoonevisitingtheWebsitewouldlearnthatthemassincarcerationofAfricanAmericanshadalreadyevisceratedmanyofthehard-earnedgainsiturgeditsmemberstoprotect.Imagine if civil rights organizations andAfricanAmerican leaders in the 1940s had not placed Jim

Crowsegregationattheforefrontoftheirracialjusticeagenda.Itwouldhaveseemedabsurd,giventhatracial segregationwas theprimaryvehicleof racialized social control in theUnitedStatesduring that

period.Thisbookarguesthatmassincarcerationis,metaphorically,theNewJimCrowandthatallthosewhocareaboutsocialjusticeshouldfullycommitthemselvestodismantlingthisnewracialcastesystem.Mass incarceration—not attacks on affirmative action or lax civil rights enforcement—is the mostdamagingmanifestation of the backlash against theCivilRightsMovement. The popular narrative thatemphasizesthedeathofslaveryandJimCrowandcelebratesthenation’s“triumphoverrace”withtheelectionofBarackObama, isdangerouslymisguided.Thecolorblindpublic consensus thatprevails inAmericatoday—i.e.,thewidespreadbeliefthatracenolongermatters—hasblindedustotherealitiesofraceinoursocietyandfacilitatedtheemergenceofanewcastesystem.

Clearly,much has changed inmy thinking about the criminal justice system since I passed that brightorangeposterstapledtoatelephonepoletenyearsago.Forme,thenewcastesystemisnowasobviousasmyownfaceinthemirror.Likeanopticalillusion—oneinwhichtheembeddedimageisimpossibletoseeuntilitsoutlineisidentified—thenewcastesystemlurksinvisiblywithinthemazeofrationalizationswehavedevelopedforpersistentracial inequality. It ispossible—quiteeasy, infact—never tosee theembeddedreality.Onlyafteryearsofworkingoncriminaljusticereformdidmyownfocusfinallyshift,andthentherigidcastesystemslowlycameintoview.Eventuallyitbecameobvious.NowitseemsoddthatIcouldnotseeitbefore.KnowingasIdothedifficultyofseeingwhatmosteveryoneinsistsdoesnotexist,Ianticipatethatthis

book will be met with skepticism or something worse. For some, the characterization of massincarcerationasa“racialcastesystem”mayseemlikeagrossexaggeration, ifnothyperbole.Yes,wemayhave“classes”intheUnitedStates—vaguelydefinedupper,middle,andlowerclasses—andwemayevenhavean“underclass”(agroupsoestrangedfrommainstreamsocietythatitisnolongerinreachofthemythical ladder of opportunity), butwedonot,manywill insist, have anything in this country thatresemblesa“caste.”Theaimofthisbookisnottoventureintothelong-running,vigorousdebateinthescholarlyliterature

regardingwhatdoesanddoesnotconstituteacastesystem.Iusethetermracialcaste in thisbook thewayitisusedincommonparlancetodenoteastigmatizedracialgrouplockedintoaninferiorpositionbylaw and custom. Jim Crow and slavery were caste systems. So is our current system of massincarceration.Itmaybehelpful,inattemptingtounderstandthebasicnatureofthenewcastesystem,tothinkofthe

criminal justice system—the entire collection of institutions and practices that comprise it—not as anindependent system but rather as a gateway into a much larger system of racial stigmatization andpermanentmarginalization.This larger system, referred to here asmass incarceration, is a system thatlockspeoplenotonlybehindactualbarsinactualprisons,butalsobehindvirtualbarsandvirtualwalls—wallsthatareinvisibletothenakedeyebutfunctionnearlyaseffectivelyasJimCrowlawsoncedidatlockingpeopleofcolor intoapermanentsecond-classcitizenship.The termmass incarceration refersnotonlytothecriminaljusticesystembutalsotothelargerweboflaws,rules,policies,andcustomsthatcontrolthoselabeledcriminalsbothinandoutofprison.Oncereleased,formerprisonersenterahiddenunderworldoflegalizeddiscriminationandpermanentsocialexclusion.TheyaremembersofAmerica’snewundercaste.The languageofcastemaywell seemforeignorunfamiliar tosome.Publicdiscussionsabout racial

casteinAmericaarerelativelyrare.Weavoidtalkingaboutcasteinoursocietybecauseweareashamedofourracialhistory.Wealsoavoidtalkingaboutrace.Weevenavoidtalkingaboutclass.Conversationsaboutclassareresistedinpartbecausethereisatendencytoimaginethatone’sclassreflectsuponone’scharacter.WhatiskeytoAmerica’sunderstandingofclassisthepersistentbelief—despiteallevidenceto the contrary—that anyone,with the proper discipline and drive, canmove from a lower class to ahigherclass.Werecognizethatmobilitymaybedifficult,butthekeytoourcollectiveself-imageisthe

assumption that mobility is always possible, so failure to move up reflects on one’s character. Byextension,thefailureofaraceorethnicgrouptomoveupreflectsverypoorlyonthegroupasawhole.What iscompletelymissedin therarepublicdebates todayabout theplightofAfricanAmericans is

thatahugepercentageofthemarenotfreetomoveupatall.Itisnotjustthattheylackopportunity,attendpoorschools,orareplaguedbypoverty.Theyarebarredbylawfromdoingso.Andthemajorinstitutionswithwhichtheycomeintocontactaredesignedtopreventtheirmobility.Toputthematterstarkly:ThecurrentsystemofcontrolpermanentlylocksahugepercentageoftheAfricanAmericancommunityoutofthemainstreamsocietyandeconomy.Thesystemoperatesthroughourcriminaljusticeinstitutions,butitfunctionsmorelikeacastesystemthanasystemofcrimecontrol.Viewedfromthisperspective,theso-called underclass is better understood as an undercaste—a lower caste of individuals who arepermanentlybarredbylawandcustomfrommainstreamsociety.Althoughthisnewsystemofracializedsocialcontrolpurportstobecolorblind,itcreatesandmaintainsracialhierarchymuchasearliersystemsofcontroldid.LikeJimCrow(andslavery),massincarcerationoperatesasatightlynetworkedsystemoflaws, policies, customs, and institutions that operate collectively to ensure the subordinate status of agroupdefinedlargelybyrace.Thisargumentmaybeparticularlyhard to swallowgiven theelectionofBarackObama.Manywill

wonderhowanationthatjustelecteditsfirstblackpresidentcouldpossiblyhavearacialcastesystem.It’s a fair question. But as discussed in chapter 6, there is no inconsistency whatsoever between theelectionofBarackObamatothehighestofficeinthelandandtheexistenceofaracialcastesystemintheeraofcolorblindness.Thecurrentsystemofcontroldependsonblackexceptionalism;itisnotdisprovedorunderminedbyit.OthersmaywonderhowaracialcastesystemcouldexistwhenmostAmericans—ofallcolors—opposeracediscriminationandendorsecolorblindness.Yetasweshallseeinthepagesthatfollow,racialcastesystemsdonotrequireracialhostilityorovertbigotrytothrive.Theyneedonlyracialindifference,asMartinLutherKingJr.warnedmorethanforty-fiveyearsago.The recent decisions by some state legislatures, most notably New York’s, to repeal or reduce

mandatorydrugsentencinglawshaveledsometobelievethatthesystemofracialcontroldescribedinthisbookisalreadyfadingaway.Suchaconclusion,Ibelieve, isaseriousmistake.Manyofthestatesthathavereconsideredtheirharshsentencingschemeshavedonesonotoutofconcernforthelivesandfamilies that have been destroyed by these laws or the racial dimensions of the drugwar, but out ofconcernforburstingstatebudgetsinatimeofeconomicrecession.Inotherwords,theracialideologythatgaverisetotheselawsremainslargelyundisturbed.Changingeconomicconditionsorrisingcrimeratescouldeasily result ina reversalof fortunes for thosewhocommitdrugcrimes,particularly if thedrugcriminalsareperceivedtobeblackandbrown.Equallyimportanttounderstandisthis:Merelyreducingsentencelength,byitself,doesnotdisturbthebasicarchitectureoftheNewJimCrow.SolongaslargenumbersofAfricanAmericanscontinuetobearrestedandlabeleddrugcriminals,theywillcontinuetoberelegated toapermanentsecond-classstatusupon their release,nomatterhowmuch(orhowlittle)time theyspendbehindbars.Thesystemofmass incarceration isbasedon theprison label,notprisontime.Skepticism about the claims made here is warranted. There are important differences, to be sure,

amongmassincarceration,JimCrow,andslavery—thethreemajorracializedsystemsofcontroladoptedintheUnitedStatestodate.Failuretoacknowledgetherelevantdifferences,aswellastheirimplications,wouldbe a disservice to racial justicediscourse.Manyof thedifferences arenot as dramatic as theyinitiallyappear,however;othersservetoillustratethewaysinwhichsystemsofracializedsocialcontrolhavemanagedtomorph,evolve,andadapttochangesinthepolitical,social,andlegalcontextovertime.Ultimately,Ibelievethatthesimilaritiesbetweenthesesystemsofcontroloverwhelmthedifferencesandthatmass incarceration, like itspredecessors, hasbeen largely immunized from legal challenge. If thisclaimissubstantiallycorrect,theimplicationsforracialjusticeadvocacyareprofound.

Withthebenefitofhindsight,surelywecanseethatpiecemealpolicyreformorlitigationalonewouldhavebeen a futile approach todismantling JimCrowsegregation.While those strategies certainlyhadtheirplace, theCivilRightsActof1964and theconcomitantcultural shiftwouldneverhaveoccurredwithout thecultivationofacriticalpoliticalconsciousness in theAfricanAmericancommunityand thewidespread,strategicactivismthatflowedfromit.Likewise,thenotionthattheNewJimCrowcaneverbe dismantled through traditional litigation and policy-reform strategies that are wholly disconnectedfromamajorsocialmovementseemsfundamentallymisguided.Suchamovementisimpossible,though,ifthosemostcommittedtoabolishingracialhierarchycontinue

to talk and behave as if a state-sponsored racial caste system no longer exists. If we continue to tellourselvesthepopularmythsaboutracialprogressor,worseyet,ifwesaytoourselvesthattheproblemofmass incarceration is just toobig, toodaunting for us todo anything about and thatwe should insteaddirectourenergiestobattlesthatmightbemoreeasilywon,historywilljudgeusharshly.Ahumanrightsnightmareisoccurringonourwatch.Anewsocialconsensusmustbeforgedaboutraceandtheroleofraceindefiningthebasicstructureof

oursociety,ifwehopeevertoabolishtheNewJimCrow.Thisnewconsensusmustbeginwithdialogue,a conversation that fosters a critical consciousness, a key prerequisite to effective social action. Thisbookisanattempttoensurethattheconversationdoesnotendwithnervouslaughter.

It is notpossible towrite a relatively shortbook that explores all aspectsof thephenomenonofmassincarcerationanditsimplicationsforracialjustice.Noattempthasbeenmadetodosohere.Thisbookpaintswith a broad brush, and as a result,many important issues have not received the attention theydeserve.Forexample,relatively little issaidhereabout theuniqueexperienceofwomen,Latinos,andimmigrants in the criminal justice system, though these groups are particularly vulnerable to theworstabusesandsufferinwaysthatareimportantanddistinct.ThisbookfocusesontheexperienceofAfricanAmericanmeninthenewcastesystem.Ihopeotherscholarsandadvocateswillpickupwherethebookleavesoffanddevelopthecritiquemorefullyorapplythethemessketchedheretoothergroupsandothercontexts.What thisbookis intendedtodo—theonly thingit is intendedtodo—istostimulateamuch-needed

conversationabouttheroleofthecriminaljusticesystemincreatingandperpetuatingracialhierarchyintheUnitedStates.Thefateofmillionsofpeople—indeedthefutureoftheblackcommunityitself—maydependonthewillingnessof thosewhocareaboutracial justice tore-examinetheirbasicassumptionsabouttheroleofthecriminaljusticesysteminoursociety.ThefactthatmorethanhalfoftheyoungblackmeninanylargeAmericancityarecurrentlyunderthecontrolofthecriminaljusticesystem(orsaddledwith criminal records) is not—asmany argue—just a symptomof poverty or poor choices, but ratherevidenceofanewracialcastesystematwork.Chapter1beginsour journey.Itbrieflyreviewsthehistoryofracializedsocialcontrol in theUnited

States,answeringthebasicquestion:Howdidwegethere?ThechapterdescribesthecontrolofAfricanAmericansthroughracialcastesystems,suchasslaveryandJimCrow,whichappeartodiebutthenarereborninnewform,tailoredtotheneedsandconstraintsofthetime.Asweshallsee,thereisacertainpatterntothebirthsanddeathsofracialcasteinAmerica.Timeandagain,themostardentproponentsofracial hierarchy have succeeded in creating new caste systems by triggering a collapse of resistanceacross the political spectrum. This feat has been achieved largely by appealing to the racism andvulnerabilityoflower-classwhites,agroupofpeoplewhoareunderstandablyeagertoensurethattheynever find themselves trapped at the bottom of theAmerican totem pole. This pattern, dating back toslavery,hasbirthedyetanotherracialcastesystemintheUnitedStates:massincarceration.Thestructureofmassincarcerationisdescribedinsomedetailinchapter2,withafocusontheWaron

Drugs. Few legal rules meaningfully constrain the police in the drug war, and enormous financial

incentives have been granted to law enforcement to engage inmass drug arrests throughmilitary-styletactics.Oncesweptintothesystem,one’schancesofeverbeingtrulyfreeareslim,oftentothevanishingpoint.Defendantsaretypicallydeniedmeaningfullegalrepresentation,pressuredbythethreatoflengthysentences intoapleabargain,and thenplacedunder formalcontrol—inprisonor jail,onprobationorparole.Uponrelease,ex-offendersarediscriminatedagainst,legally,fortherestoftheirlives,andmostwilleventuallyreturntoprison.TheyaremembersofAmerica’snewundercaste.Chapter 3 turns our attention to the role of race in theU.S. criminal justice system. It describes the

method to themadness—how a formally race-neutral criminal justice system canmanage to round up,arrest,andimprisonanextraordinarynumberofblackandbrownmen,whenpeopleofcolorareactuallynomorelikelytobeguiltyofdrugcrimesandmanyotheroffensesthanwhites.Thischapterdebunksthenotion that rates of black imprisonment can be explained by crime rates and identifies the huge racialdisparitiesateverystageofthecriminaljusticeprocess—fromtheinitialstop,search,andarresttothepleabargainingandsentencingphases.Inshort,thechapterexplainshowthelegalrulesthatstructurethesystemguaranteediscriminatoryresults.These legalrulesensure that theundercaste isoverwhelminglyblackandbrown.Chapter 4 considers how the caste system operates once people are released from prison. Inmany

respects,releasefromprisondoesnotrepresentthebeginningoffreedombutinsteadacruelnewphaseofstigmatization and control. Myriad laws, rules, and regulations discriminate against ex-offenders andeffectivelypreventtheirmeaningfulreintegrationintothemainstreameconomyandsociety.Iarguethattheshame and stigma of the “prison label” is, inmany respects,more damaging to theAfricanAmericancommunitythantheshameandstigmaassociatedwithJimCrow.Thecriminalizationanddemonizationofblackmenhasturnedtheblackcommunityagainstitself,unravelingcommunityandfamilyrelationships,decimating networks of mutual support, and intensifying the shame and self-hate experienced by thecurrentpariahcaste.Themany parallels betweenmass incarceration and JimCrow are explored in chapter 5.Themost

obvious parallel is legalized discrimination. Like Jim Crow, mass incarceration marginalizes largesegmentsoftheAfricanAmericancommunity,segregatesthemphysically(inprisons,jails,andghettos),and then authorizes discrimination against them in voting, employment, housing, education, publicbenefits, and jury service.The federal court systemhas effectively immunized the current system fromchallengesonthegroundsofracialbias,muchasearliersystemsofcontrolwereprotectedandendorsedbytheU.S.SupremeCourt.Theparallelsdonotendthere,however.Massincarceration,likeJimCrow,helps to define the meaning and significance of race in America. Indeed, the stigma of criminalityfunctionsinmuchthesamewaythatthestigmaofraceoncedid.Itjustifiesalegal,social,andeconomicboundarybetween“us”and“them.”Chapter5alsoexploressomeofthedifferencesamongslavery,JimCrow,andmassincarceration,mostsignificantlythefactthatmassincarcerationisdesignedtowarehousea population deemed disposable—unnecessary to the functioning of the new global economy—whileearlier systems of control were designed to exploit and control black labor. In addition, the chapterdiscusses the experience of white people in this new caste system; although they have not been theprimarytargetsofthedrugwar,theyhavebeenharmedbyit—apowerfulillustrationofhowaracialstatecan harm people of all colors. Finally, this chapter responds to skeptics who claim that massincarcerationcannotbeunderstoodasaracialcastesystembecausemany“gettoughoncrime”policiesare supportedbyAfricanAmericans.Manyof these claims, I note, arenomorepersuasive today thanargumentsmadeahundredyearsagobyblacksandwhiteswhoclaimed that racial segregation simplyreflected“reality,”notracialanimus,andthatAfricanAmericanswouldbebetteroffnotchallengingtheJimCrow system but should focus instead on improving themselveswithin it. Throughout our history,therehavebeenAfricanAmericanswho,foravarietyofreasons,havedefendedorbeencomplicitwiththeprevailingsystemofcontrol.

Chapter6reflectsonwhatacknowledgingthepresenceoftheNewJimCrowmeansforthefutureofcivilrightsadvocacy.Iarguethatnothingshortofamajorsocialmovementcansuccessfullydismantlethenewcastesystem.Meaningful reformscanbeachievedwithoutsuchamovement,butunless thepublicconsensus supporting the current system is completely overturned, the basic structure of the new castesystemwill remain intact. Building a broad-based socialmovement, however, is not enough. It is notnearlyenoughtopersuademainstreamvotersthatwehavereliedtooheavilyonincarcerationorthatdrugabuse is a public health problem, not a crime. If the movement that emerges to challenge massincarcerationfailstoconfrontsquarelythecriticalroleofraceinthebasicstructureofoursociety,andifitfails tocultivateanethicofgenuinecare,compassion,andconcernforeveryhumanbeing—ofeveryclass, race, and nationality—within our nation’s borders (including poorwhites, who are often pittedagainstpoorpeopleofcolor),thecollapseofmassincarcerationwillnotmeanthedeathofracialcasteinAmerica.Inevitablyanewsystemofracializedsocialcontrolwillemerge—onethatwecannotforesee,justasthecurrentsystemofmassincarcerationwasnotpredictedbyanyonethirtyyearsago.NotaskismoreurgentforracialjusticeadvocatestodaythanensuringthatAmerica’scurrentracialcastesystemisitslast.

1

TheRebirthofCaste

[T]heslavewentfree;stoodabriefmomentinthesun;thenmovedbackagaintowardslavery.—W.E.BDuBois,BlackReconstructioninAmerica

Formore than one hundred years, scholars havewritten about the illusory nature of theEmancipationProclamation.PresidentAbrahamLincolnissuedadeclarationpurportingtofreeslavesheldinSouthernConfederatestates,butnotasingleblackslavewasactually free towalkawayfromamaster in thosestatesasaresult.Acivilwarhadtobewonfirst,hundredsofthousandsofliveslost,andthen—onlythen—wereslavesacrosstheSouthsetfree.Eventhatfreedomprovedillusory,though.AsW.E.B.DuBoiseloquentlyremindsus,formerslaveshad“abriefmomentinthesun”beforetheywerereturnedtoastatusakin to slavery. Constitutional amendments guaranteeing African Americans “equal protection of thelaws”andtherighttovoteprovedasimpotentastheEmancipationProclamationonceawhitebacklashagainstReconstructiongainedsteam.Blackpeoplefoundthemselvesyetagainpowerlessandrelegatedtoconvictleasingcampsthatwere,inmanyways,worsethanslavery.Sunshinegavewaytodarkness,andthe JimCrow systemof segregation emerged—a system that put black people nearly backwhere theybegan,inasubordinateracialcaste.Few find it surprising that Jim Crow arose following the collapse of slavery. The development is

describedinhistorybooksasregrettablebutpredictable,giventhevirulentracismthatgrippedtheSouthand thepoliticaldynamicsof the time.What is remarkable is thathardlyanyoneseems to imagine thatsimilarpoliticaldynamicsmayhaveproducedanothercastesystemintheyearsfollowingthecollapseofJimCrow—onethatexiststoday.ThestorythatistoldduringBlackHistoryMonthisoneoftriumph;thesystemofracialcaste isofficiallydeadandburied.Suggestionstothecontraryarefrequentlymetwithshockeddisbelief.Thestandardreplyis:“Howcanyousaythataracialcastesystemexiststoday?JustlookatBarackObama!JustlookatOprahWinfrey!”Thefact thatsomeAfricanAmericanshaveexperiencedgreatsuccess inrecentyearsdoesnotmean

thatsomethingakintoaracialcastesystemnolongerexists.NocastesystemintheUnitedStateshasevergovernedallblackpeople;therehavealwaysbeen“freeblacks”andblacksuccessstories,evenduringslaveryandJimCrow.Thesuperlativenatureof individualblackachievement today in formerlywhitedomains is agood indicator that JimCrow isdead,but it doesnotnecessarilymean the endof racialcaste.Ifhistoryisanyguide,itmayhavesimplytakenadifferentform.AnycandidobserverofAmericanracialhistorymustacknowledgethatracismishighlyadaptable.The

rules and reasons thepolitical systememploys to enforce status relationsof anykind, including racialhierarchy,evolveandchangeastheyarechallenged.ThevalianteffortstoabolishslaveryandJimCrowand toachievegreater racialequalityhavebroughtaboutsignificantchanges in the legal frameworkofAmericansociety—new“rulesof thegame,” so to speak.Thesenewruleshavebeen justifiedbynewrhetoric, new language, and a new social consensus, while producingmany of the same results. Thisdynamic, which legal scholar Reva Siegel has dubbed “preservation through transformation,” is the

processthroughwhichwhiteprivilegeismaintained,thoughtherulesandrhetoricchange.1Thisprocess,thoughdifficulttorecognizeatanygivenmoment,iseasiertoseeinretrospect.Sincethe

nation’sfounding,AfricanAmericansrepeatedlyhavebeencontrolledthroughinstitutionssuchasslaveryandJimCrow,whichappeartodie,butthenarereborninnewform,tailoredtotheneedsandconstraintsofthetime.Asdescribedinthepagesthatfollow,thereisacertainpatterntothiscycle.Followingthecollapseofeachsystemofcontrol,therehasbeenaperiodofconfusion—transition—inwhichthosewhoaremostcommittedtoracialhierarchysearchfornewmeanstoachievetheirgoalswithintherulesofthegameascurrentlydefined.It isduringthisperiodofuncertaintythat thebacklashintensifiesandanewformofracializedsocialcontrolbeginstotakehold.Theadoptionofthenewsystemofcontrolisneverinevitable,but todate it hasneverbeenavoided.Themost ardentproponentsof racialhierarchyhaveconsistently succeeded in implementingnewracial caste systemsby triggeringacollapseof resistanceacross the political spectrum. This feat has been achieved largely by appealing to the racism andvulnerabilityoflower-classwhites,agroupofpeoplewhoareunderstandablyeagertoensurethattheyneverfindthemselvestrappedatthebottomoftheAmericanhierarchy.Theemergenceofeachnewsystemofcontrolmayseemsudden,buthistoryshowsthattheseedsare

plantedlongbeforeeachnewinstitutionbeginstogrow.Forexample,althoughitiscommontothinkoftheJimCrowregimefollowingimmediatelyontheheelsofReconstruction,thetruthismorecomplicated.And while it is generally believed that the backlash against the Civil Rights Movement is definedprimarilybytherollbackofaffirmativeactionandtheunderminingoffederalcivilrightslegislationbyahostile judiciary, theseedsof thenewsystemofcontrol—mass incarceration—wereplantedduring theCivilRightsMovementitself,whenitbecameclearthattheoldcastesystemwascrumblingandanewonewouldhavetotakeitsplace.Witheachreincarnationofracialcaste,thenewsystem,associologistLoïcWacquantputsit,“isless

total, less capable of encompassing and controlling the entire race.”2 However, any notion that thisevolution reflects somekindof linearprogresswouldbemisguided, for it is not at all obvious that itwouldbebettertobeincarceratedforlifeforaminordrugoffensethantolivewithone’sfamily,earningan honest living under the Jim Crow regime—notwithstanding the ever-present threat of the Klan.Moreover,asthesystemsofcontrolhaveevolved,theyhavebecomeperfected,arguablymoreresilienttochallenge,andthuscapableofenduringforgenerationstocome.Thestoryofthepoliticalandeconomicunderpinningsofthenation’sfoundingshedssomelightontheserecurringthemesinourhistoryandthereasonsnewracialcastesystemscontinuetobeborn.

TheBirthofSlavery

Backthere,beforeJimCrow,beforetheinventionoftheNegroorthewhitemanorthewordsandconcepts todescribe them, theColonialpopulationconsisted largelyofagreatmassofwhiteandblackbondsmen,whooccupied roughly the same economic category andwere treatedwith equalcontemptby the lordsof theplantationsand legislatures.Curiouslyunconcernedabout theircolor,thesepeopleworkedtogetherandrelaxedtogether.3

—LeroneBennettJr.

Theconceptofraceisarelativelyrecentdevelopment.Onlyinthepastfewcenturies,owinglargelyto

Europeanimperialism,havetheworld’speoplebeenclassifiedalongraciallines.4Here,inAmerica,theideaofraceemergedasameansofreconcilingchattelslavery—aswellastheexterminationofAmericanIndians—withtheidealsoffreedompreachedbywhitesinthenewcolonies.Intheearlycolonialperiod,whensettlementsremainedrelativelysmall,indenturedservitudewasthe

dominantmeansofsecuringcheaplabor.Underthissystem,whitesandblacksstruggledtosurviveagainstacommonenemy,whathistorianLeroneBennettJr.describesas“thebigplanterapparatusandasocialsystemthatlegalizedterroragainstblackandwhitebondsmen.”5Initially,blacksbroughttothiscountrywere not all enslaved; many were treated as indentured servants. As plantation farming expanded,particularlytobaccoandcottonfarming,demandincreasedgreatlyforbothlaborandland.The demand for land was met by invading and conquering larger and larger swaths of territory.

AmericanIndiansbecameagrowingimpedimenttowhiteEuropean“progress,”andduringthisperiod,the images of American Indians promoted in books, newspapers, and magazines became increasinglynegative.AssociologistsKeithKiltyandEricSwankhaveobserved,eliminating“savages”islessofamoralproblemthaneliminatinghumanbeings,andthereforeAmericanIndianscametobeunderstoodasalesser race—uncivilized savages—thus providing a justification for the extermination of the nativepeoples.6The growing demand for labor on plantations was met through slavery. American Indians were

consideredunsuitableasslaves,largelybecausenativetribeswereclearlyinapositiontofightback.Thefear of raids by Indian tribes led plantation owners to grasp for an alternative source of free labor.Europeanimmigrantswerealsodeemedpoorcandidatesforslavery,notbecauseoftheirrace,butratherbecause they were in short supply and enslavement would, quite naturally, interfere with voluntaryimmigration to the new colonies. Plantation owners thus viewed Africans, who were relativelypowerless,astheidealslaves.ThesystematicenslavementofAfricans,andtherearingoftheirchildrenunderbondage,emergedwithalldeliberatespeed—quickenedbyeventssuchasBacon’sRebellion.NathanielBaconwasawhitepropertyowner in Jamestown,Virginia,whomanaged tounite slaves,

indentured servants, and poorwhites in a revolutionary effort to overthrow the planter elite.Althoughslaves clearly occupied the lowest position in the social hierarchy and suffered the most under theplantationsystem, theconditionof indenturedwhiteswasbarelybetter,and themajorityof freewhiteslivedinextremepoverty.AsexplainedbyhistorianEdmundMorgan,incolonieslikeVirginia,theplanterelite, with huge land grants, occupied a vastly superior position to workers of all colors.7 Southerncoloniesdidnothesitatetoinventwaystoextendthetermsofservitude,andtheplanterclassaccumulateduncultivated lands to restrict theoptionsof freeworkers.Thesimmering resentmentagainst theplanterclasscreatedconditionsthatwereripeforrevolt.VaryingaccountsofBacon’srebellionabound,butthebasicfactsarethese:Bacondevelopedplansin

1675toseizeNativeAmericanlandsinordertoacquiremorepropertyforhimselfandothersandnullifythe threat of Indian raids.When the planter elite inVirginia refused to providemilitia support for hisscheme, Bacon retaliated, leading an attack on the elite, their homes, and their property. He openlycondemned the rich for their oppressionof thepoor and inspired an allianceofwhite andblackbondlaborers,aswellasslaves,whodemandedanendtotheirservitude.Theattemptedrevolutionwasendedby force and false promises of amnesty. A number of the peoplewho participated in the revolt werehanged. The events in Jamestown were alarming to the planter elite, who were deeply fearful of themultiracial allianceof bondworkers and slaves.WordofBacon’s rebellion spread far andwide, andseveralmoreuprisingsofasimilartypefollowed.Inanefforttoprotecttheirsuperiorstatusandeconomicposition,theplantersshiftedtheirstrategyfor

maintaining dominance. They abandoned their heavy reliance on indentured servants in favor of theimportationofmoreblackslaves.InsteadofimportingEnglish-speakingslavesfromtheWestIndies,whoweremore likely to be familiarwithEuropean language and culture,manymore slaveswere shippeddirectlyfromAfrica.Theseslaveswouldbefareasiertocontrolandfarlesslikelytoformallianceswithpoorwhites.Fearful that suchmeasuresmightnotbe sufficient toprotect their interests, theplanter class tookan

additionalprecautionarystep,astepthatwouldlatercometobeknownasa“racialbribe.”Deliberatelyand strategically, the planter class extended special privileges to poor whites in an effort to drive awedgebetweenthemandblackslaves.WhitesettlerswereallowedgreateraccesstoNativeAmericanlands,whiteservantswereallowedtopoliceslavesthroughslavepatrolsandmilitias,andbarrierswerecreated so that free labor would not be placed in competition with slave labor. These measureseffectively eliminated the risk of future alliances between black slaves and poorwhites. Poorwhitessuddenlyhadadirect,personalstakeintheexistenceofarace-basedsystemofslavery.Theirownplighthadnotimprovedbymuch,butatleasttheywerenotslaves.Oncetheplanterelitesplitthelaborforce,poorwhitesrespondedtothelogicoftheirsituationandsoughtwaystoexpandtheirraciallyprivilegedposition.8Bythemid-1770s,thesystemofbondlaborhadbeenthoroughlytransformedintoaracialcastesystem

predicatedonslavery.ThedegradedstatusofAfricanswasjustifiedonthegroundthatNegros,liketheIndians,wereanuncivilizedlesserrace,perhapsevenmorelackinginintelligenceandlaudablehumanqualities than the red-skinned natives. The notion of white supremacy rationalized the enslavement ofAfricans,evenaswhitesendeavored to formanewnationbasedon the idealsofequality, liberty,andjusticeforall.Beforedemocracy,chattelslaveryinAmericawasborn.ItmaybeimpossibletooverstatethesignificanceofraceindefiningthebasicstructureofAmerican

society.ThestructureandcontentoftheoriginalConstitutionwasbasedlargelyontheefforttopreservearacialcastesystem—slavery—whileatthesametimeaffordingpoliticalandeconomicrightstowhites,especiallypropertiedwhites.Thesouthernslaveholdingcolonieswouldagreetoformauniononlyontheconditionthatthefederalgovernmentwouldnotbeabletointerferewiththerighttoownslaves.Northernwhite elites were sympathetic to the demand for their “property rights” to be respected, as they, too,wantedtheConstitutiontoprotecttheirpropertyinterests.AsJamesMadisonputit,thenationoughttobeconstituted“toprotect theminorityof theopulentagainst themajority.”9Consequently, theConstitutionwasdesignedsothefederalgovernmentwouldbeweak,notonlyinitsrelationshiptoprivateproperty,butalsoinrelationshiptotherightsofstatestoconducttheirownaffairs.ThelanguageoftheConstitutionitselfwasdeliberatelycolorblind (thewords slave orNegrowere never used), but the documentwasbuiltuponacompromiseregardingtheprevailingracialcastesystem.Federalism—thedivisionofpowerbetween the states and the federal government—was the device employed to protect the institution ofslavery and the political power of slaveholding states. Even themethod for determining proportionalrepresentation inCongress and identifying thewinner of a presidential election (the electoral college)

werespecificallydevelopedwiththeinterestofslaveholdersinmind.Underthetermsofourcountry’sfoundingdocument,slavesweredefinedasthree-fifthsofaman,notareal,wholehumanbeing.UponthisracistfictionreststheentirestructureofAmericandemocracy.

TheDeathofSlavery

ThehistoryofracialcasteintheUnitedStateswouldendwiththeCivilWariftheideaofraceandracialdifferencehaddiedwhentheinstitutionofslaverywasputtorest.Butduringthefourcenturiesinwhichslavery flourished, the idea of race flourished as well. Indeed, the notion of racial difference—specificallythenotionofwhitesupremacy—provedfarmoredurablethantheinstitutionthatgavebirthtoit.White supremacy,over time,becamea religionof sorts.Faith in the idea thatpeopleof theAfrican

racewere bestial, thatwhiteswere inherently superior, and that slaverywas, in fact, for blacks’ owngood, served to alleviate the white conscience and reconcile the tension between slavery and thedemocratic ideals espousedbywhites in the so-calledNewWorld.Therewas no contradiction in theboldclaimmadebyThomasJeffersonintheDeclarationofIndependencethat“allmenarecreatedequal”ifAfricanswere not really people.Racismoperated as a deeply held belief systembasedon “truths”beyondquestionordoubt.Thisdeepfaithinwhitesupremacynotonlyjustifiedaneconomicandpoliticalsystem in which plantation owners acquired land and great wealth through the brutality, torture, andcoercion of other human beings; it also endured, like most articles of faith, long after the historicalcircumstancesthatgaveriseto thereligionpassedaway.InWacquant’swords:“Racialdivisionwasaconsequence,notapreconditionofslavery,butonceitwasinstituteditbecamedetachedfromitsinitialfunctionandacquiredasocialpotencyallitsown.”10Afterthedeathofslavery,theideaofracelivedon.One of themost compelling accounts of the postemancipation period isThe StrangeCareer of Jim

Crow,writtenbyC.VannWoodward in1955.11Thebookcontinues tobe the focalpointof studyanddebatebyscholarsandwasoncedescribedbyMartinLutherKingJr.asthe“historicalbibleoftheCivilRightsMovement.”AsWoodwardtellsthestory,theendofslaverycreatedanextraordinarydilemmaforSouthernwhitesociety.Withoutthelaborofformerslaves,theregion’seconomywouldsurelycollapse,andwithout the institution of slavery, therewas no longer a formalmechanism formaintaining racialhierarchy and preventing “amalgamation”with a group of people considered intrinsically inferior andvile. This state of affairs produced a temporary anarchy and a state of mind bordering on hysteria,particularlyamongtheplanterelite.Butevenamongpoorwhites,thecollapseofslaverywasabitterpill.IntheantebellumSouth,thelowliestwhitepersonatleastpossessedhisorherwhiteskin—abadgeofsuperiorityovereventhemostskilledslaveorprosperousfreeAfricanAmerican.While Southernwhites—poor and rich alike—were utterly outraged by emancipation, therewas no

obvious solution to the dilemma they faced. Following the Civil War, the economic and politicalinfrastructure of the South was in shambles. Plantation owners were suddenly destitute, and stategovernments,shackledbywardebt,werepenniless.Largeamountsofrealestateandotherpropertyhadbeendestroyedinthewar,industrywasdisorganized,andhundredsofthousandsofmenhadbeenkilledormaimed.With all of thiswent the demoralizing effect of an unsuccessfulwar and the extraordinarychallenges associated with rebuilding new state and local governments. Add to all this the suddenpresence of 4million newly freed slaves, and the picture becomes evenmore complicated. Southernwhites,Woodwardexplains,stronglybelievedthatanewsystemofracialcontrolwasclearlyrequired,butitwasnotimmediatelyobviouswhatformitshouldtake.Underslavery,theracialorderwasmosteffectivelymaintainedbyalargedegreeofcontactbetween

slaveownersandslaves, thusmaximizingopportunities for supervisionanddiscipline,andminimizingthe potential for active resistance or rebellion. Strict separation of the races would have threatenedslaveholders’immediateinterestsandwas,inanyevent,whollyunnecessaryasameansofcreatingsocialdistanceorestablishingtheinferiorstatusofslaves.Following theCivilWar, it was unclearwhat institutions, laws, or customswould be necessary to

maintainwhitecontrolnowthatslaverywasgone.Nonetheless,asnumeroushistorianshaveshown,thedevelopmentofanewracialorderbecametheconsumingpassionformostwhiteSoutherners.Rumorsofa great insurrection terrified whites, and blacks increasingly came to be viewed as menacing anddangerous.Infact,thecurrentstereotypesofblackmenasaggressive,unrulypredatorscanbetracedtothisperiod,whenwhites feared thatanangrymassofblackmenmight riseupandattack themor rapetheirwomen.Equally worrisome was the state of the economy. Former slaves literally walked away from their

plantations,causingpanicandoutrageamongplantationowners.Largenumbersofformerslavesroamedthe highways in the early years after thewar. Some converged on towns and cities; others joined thefederalmilitia.Mostwhite people believedAfricanAmericans lacked the propermotivation towork,promptingtheprovisionalSouthernlegislaturestoadoptthenotoriousblackcodes.AsexpressedbyoneAlabama planter: “We have the power to pass stringent police laws to govern theNegroes—this is ablessing—for theymustbecontrolled in somewayorwhitepeoplecannot liveamong them.”12Whilesome of these codes were intended to establish systems of peonage resembling slavery, othersforeshadowed JimCrow laws by prohibiting, among other things, interracial seating in the first-classsectionsofrailroadcarsandbysegregatingschools.Althoughtheconvictlawsenactedduringthisperiodarerarelyseenaspartoftheblackcodes,thatisa

mistake.As explainedbyhistorianWilliamCohen, “themain purpose of the codeswas to control thefreedmen,andthequestionofhowtohandleconvictedblacklawbreakerswasverymuchatthecenterofthecontrolissue.”13Ninesouthernstatesadoptedvagrancylaws—whichessentiallymadeitacriminaloffense not towork andwere applied selectively to blacks—and eight of those states enacted convictlaws allowing for the hiring-out of county prisoners to plantation owners and private companies.Prisonerswereforcedtoworkforlittleornopay.Onevagrancyactspecificallyprovidedthat“allfreenegroesandmulattoesovertheageofeighteen”musthavewrittenproofofajobatthebeginningofeveryyear.Thosefoundwithnolawfulemploymentweredeemedvagrantsandconvicted.Clearly,thepurposeof the black codes in general and the vagrancy laws in particular was to establish another system offorcedlabor.InW.E.B.DuBois’swords:“TheCodesspokeforthemselves....Noopen-mindedstudentcanreadthemwithoutbeingconvincedtheymeantnothingmorenorlessthanslaveryindailytoil.”14Ultimately,theblackcodeswereoverturned,andaslewoffederalcivilrightslegislationprotectingthe

newlyfreedslaveswaspassedduringtherelativelybriefbutextraordinaryperiodofblackadvancementknown as the Reconstruction Era. The impressive legislative achievements of this period include theThirteenthAmendment,abolishingslavery;theCivilRightsActof1866,bestowingfullcitizenshipuponAfricanAmericans;theFourteenthAmendment,prohibitingstatesfromdenyingcitizensdueprocessand“equalprotectionof the laws”; theFifteenthAmendment,providing that the right tovote shouldnotbedeniedonaccountofrace;andtheKuKluxKlanActs,which,amongotherthings,declaredinterferencewithvotingafederaloffenseandtheviolentinfringementofcivilrightsacrime.Thenewlegislationalsoprovidedforfederalsupervisionofvotingandauthorizedthepresidenttosendthearmyandsuspendthewritofhabeascorpusindistrictsdeclaredtobeinastateofinsurrectionagainstthefederalgovernment.In addition to federal civil rights legislation, the Reconstruction Era brought the expansion of the

Freedmen’sBureau,theagencychargedwiththeresponsibilityofprovidingfood,clothing,fuel,andotherformsof assistance todestitute former slaves.Apublic education systememerged in theSouth,whichaffordedmanyblacks(andpoorwhites)theirfirstopportunitytolearntoreadandwrite.While theReconstructionErawas fraughtwith corruption and arguablydoomedby the lackof land

reform,thesweepingeconomicandpoliticaldevelopmentsinthatperioddidappear,atleastforatime,tohave thepotential to seriouslyundermine, ifnot completelyeradicate, the racial caste system in theSouth.Withtheprotectionoffederaltroops,AfricanAmericansbegantovoteinlargenumbersandseizecontrol,insomeareas,ofthelocalpoliticalapparatus.Literacyratesclimbed,andeducatedblacksbegan

to populate legislatures, open schools, and initiate successful businesses. In 1867, at the dawn of theReconstruction Era, no blackman held political office in the South, yet three years later, at least 15percentofallSouthernelectedofficialswereblack.Thisisparticularlyextraordinaryinlightofthefactthat fifteenyears after thepassageof theVotingRightsActof1965—thehighwatermarkof theCivilRightsMovement—fewerthan8percentofallSouthernelectedofficialswereblack.15Atthesametime,however,manyofthenewcivilrightslawswereprovinglargelysymbolic.16Notably

absent from the FifteenthAmendment, for example,was language prohibiting the states from imposingeducational, residential, or other qualifications for voting, thus leaving the door open to the states toimposepoll taxes, literacy tests,andotherdevices topreventblacks fromvoting.Other laws revealedthemselves as more an assertion of principle than direct federal intervention into Southern affairs,becauseenforcementrequiredAfricanAmericanstotaketheircasestofederalcourts,acostlyandtime-consumingprocedure thatwasapractical impossibility for thevastmajorityof thosewhohadclaims.Mostblacksweretoopoortosuetoenforcetheircivilrights,andnoorganizationliketheNAACPyetexistedtospreadtherisksandcostsoflitigation.Moreover,thethreatofviolenceoftendeterredblacksfrompressinglegitimateclaims,makingthe“civilrights”offormerslaveslargelyillusory—existingonpaperbutrarelytobefoundinreallife.Meanwhile,theseparationoftheraceshadbeguntoemergeasacomprehensivepatternthroughoutthe

South,driveninlargepartbytherhetoricoftheplanterelite,whohopedtoreestablishasystemofcontrolthatwouldensurealow-paid,submissivelaborforce.RacialsegregationhadactuallybegunyearsearlierintheNorth,asanefforttopreventrace-mixingandpreserveracialhierarchyfollowingtheabolitionofNorthern slavery. It had never developed, however, into a comprehensive system—operating insteadlargely as a matter of custom, enforced with varying degrees of consistency. Even among those mosthostiletoReconstruction,fewwouldhavepredictedthatracialsegregationwouldsoonevolveintoanewracialcastesystemasstunninglycomprehensiveandrepressiveastheonethatcametobeknownsimplyasJimCrow.

TheBirthofJimCrow

ThebacklashagainstthegainsofAfricanAmericansintheReconstructionErawasswiftandsevere.AsAfrican Americans obtained political power and began the long march toward greater social andeconomic equality, whites reacted with panic and outrage. Southern conservatives vowed to reverseReconstruction and sought the “abolition of the Freedmen’s Bureau and all political instrumentalitiesdesigned to secure Negro supremacy.”17 Their campaign to “redeem” the South was reinforced by aresurgentKuKluxKlan,whichfoughtaterroristcampaignagainstReconstructiongovernmentsandlocalleaders,completewithbombings,lynchings,andmobviolence.Theterroristcampaignprovedhighlysuccessful.“Redemption”resultedinthewithdrawaloffederal

troopsfromtheSouthandtheeffectiveabandonmentofAfricanAmericansandallthosewhohadfoughtfororsupportedanegalitarianracialorder.Thefederalgovernmentnolongermadeanyefforttoenforcefederalcivilrightslegislation,andfundingfortheFreedmen’sBureauwasslashedtosuchadegreethattheagencybecamevirtuallydefunct.Once again, vagrancy laws and other laws defining activities such as “mischief” and “insulting

gestures” as crimes were enforced vigorously against blacks. The aggressive enforcement of thesecriminaloffensesopenedupanenormousmarketforconvictleasing,inwhichprisonerswerecontractedoutaslaborerstothehighestprivatebidder.DouglasBlackmon,inSlaverybyAnotherName,describeshowtensofthousandsofAfricanAmericanswerearbitrarilyarrestedduringthisperiod,manyofthemhitwithcourtcostsandfines,whichhadtobeworkedoffinordertosecuretheirrelease.18Withnomeanstopay off their “debts,” prisonerswere sold as forced laborers to lumber camps, brickyards, railroads,farms,plantations,anddozensofcorporationsthroughouttheSouth.Deathrateswereshockinglyhigh,fortheprivate contractorshadno interest in thehealth andwell-beingof their laborers, unlike the earlierslave-owners who needed their slaves, at a minimum, to be healthy enough to survive hard labor.Laborersweresubjecttoalmostcontinuallashingbylonghorsewhips,andthosewhocollapsedduetoinjuriesorexhaustionwereoftenlefttodie.Convictshadnomeaningful legal rightsat this timeandnoeffectiveredress.Theywereunderstood,

quiteliterally,tobeslavesofthestate.TheThirteenthAmendmenttotheU.S.Constitutionhadabolishedslaverybutallowedonemajorexception:slaveryremainedappropriateaspunishmentforacrime.Inalandmark decision by the Virginia Supreme Court, Ruffin v. Commonwealth, issued at the height ofSouthern Redemption, the court put to rest any notion that convicts were legally distinguishable fromslaves:

Foratime,duringhisserviceinthepenitentiary,heisinastateofpenalservitudetotheState.Hehas,asaconsequenceofhiscrime,notonlyforfeitedhisliberty,butallhispersonalrightsexceptthosewhichthelawinitshumanityaccordstohim.HeisforthetimebeingaslaveoftheState.Heiscivilitermortus;andhisestate,ifhehasany,isadministeredlikethatofadeadman.19

The state ofMississippi eventuallymoved from hiring convict labor to organizing its own convictlaborcamp,knownasParchmanFarm. Itwasnotalone.During thedecade followingRedemption, theconvict population grew ten times faster than the general population: “Prisoners became younger andblacker,andthelengthoftheirsentencessoared.”20Itwasthenation’sfirstprisonboomand,astheyaretoday, the prisoners were disproportionately black. After a brief period of progress duringReconstruction, African Americans found themselves, once again, virtually defenseless. The criminaljustice systemwas strategically employed to force African Americans back into a system of extremerepressionandcontrol,atacticthatwouldcontinuetoprovesuccessfulforgenerationstocome.Evenasconvictleasingfadedaway,strategicformsofexploitationandrepressionemergedanew.AsBlackmon

notes:“Theapparentdemise.. .ofleasingprisonersseemedaharbingerofanewday.ButtheharsherrealityoftheSouthwasthatthenewpost-CivilWarneoslaverywasevolving—notdisappearing.”21Redemptionmarked a turningpoint in the quest by dominantwhites for a new racial equilibrium, a

racialorderthatwouldprotecttheireconomic,political,andsocialinterestsinaworldwithoutslavery.Yet a clear consensus amongwhites aboutwhat thenew racial order shouldbewas still lacking.TheRedeemers who overthrew Reconstruction were inclined to retain such segregation practices as hadalreadyemerged,buttheydisplayednoapparentdispositiontoexpandoruniversalizethesystem.Threealternativephilosophiesofracerelationswereputforwardtocompetefortheregion’ssupport,

all of which rejected the doctrines of extreme racism espoused by some Redeemers: liberalism,conservatism, and radicalism. 22 The liberal philosophy of race relations emphasized the stigma ofsegregationand thehypocrisyof agovernment that celebrates freedomandequalityyetdeniesbothonaccountofrace.Thisphilosophy,bornintheNorth,nevergainedmuchtractionamongSouthernwhitesorblacks.The conservative philosophy, by contrast, attracted wide support and was implemented in various

contextsoveraconsiderableperiodoftime.Conservativesblamedliberalsforpushingblacksaheadoftheirproperstation in lifeandplacingblacks inpositions theywereunprepared to fill,acircumstancethat had allegedly contributed to their downfall. They warned blacks that some Redeemers were notsatisfiedwithhavingdecimatedReconstruction,andwereprepared towageanaggressivewaragainstblacks throughout the South. With some success, the conservatives reached out to African Americanvoters,remindingthemthattheyhadsomethingtoloseaswellasgainandthattheliberals’preoccupationwithpoliticalandeconomicequalitypresentedthedangeroflosingallthatblackshadsofargained.Theradicalphilosophyoffered,formanyAfricanAmericans,themostpromise.Itwaspredicatedona

searingcritiqueoflargecorporations,particularlyrailroads,andthewealthyeliteintheNorthandSouth.The radicalsof the latenineteenth century,who later formed thePopulistParty, viewed theprivilegedclassesasconspiring tokeeppoorwhitesandblacks locked intoasubordinatepoliticalandeconomicposition.FormanyAfricanAmericanvoters,thePopulistapproachwaspreferabletothepaternalismofliberals.Populistspreachedan“equalitarianismofwantandpoverty,thekinshipofacommongrievance,and a common oppressor.”23 As described by TomWatson, a prominent Populist leader, in a speechadvocating a union between black andwhite farmers: “You are kept apart that youmay be separatelyfleecedofyourearnings.Youaremadetohateeachotherbecauseuponthathatredisrestedthekeystoneofthearchoffinancialdespotismthatenslavesyouboth.Youaredeceivedandblindedthatyoumaynotseehowthisraceantagonismperpetuatesamonetarysystemwhichbeggarsboth.”24In an effort to demonstrate their commitment to a genuinely multiracial, working-class movement

againstwhiteelites,thePopulistsmadestridestowardracialintegration,asymboloftheircommitmenttoclass-based unity.AfricanAmericans throughout the South respondedwith great hope and enthusiasm,eager to be true partners in a struggle for social justice. According to Woodward, “It is altogetherprobable that during the brief Populist upheaval in the ninetiesNegroes and nativewhites achieved agreatercomityofmindandharmonyofpoliticalpurposethaneverbeforeorsinceintheSouth.”25The challenges inherent in creating the alliance sought by the Populists were formidable, as race

prejudiceranthehighestamongtheverywhitepopulationstowhichthePopulistappealwasspecificallyaddressed—the depressed lower economic classes. Nevertheless, the Populist movement initiallyenjoyedremarkablesuccessintheSouth,fueledbyawaveofdiscontentarousedbythesevereagrariandepressionofthe1880sand1890s.ThePopuliststookdirectaimattheconservatives,whowereknownascomprisingapartyofprivilege,andtheyachievedastunningseriesofpoliticalvictoriesthroughouttheregion.AlarmedbythesuccessofthePopulistsandtheapparentpotencyofthealliancebetweenpoorandworking-classwhitesandAfricanAmericans, theconservatives raised thecryofwhite supremacyand

resorted to the tactics they had employed in their quest forRedemption, including fraud, intimidation,bribery,andterror.Segregationlawswereproposedaspartofadeliberateefforttodriveawedgebetweenpoorwhites

andAfricanAmericans.Thesediscriminatorybarriersweredesignedtoencouragelower-classwhitestoretain a sense of superiority over blacks, making it far less likely that they would sustain interracialpoliticalalliancesaimedat toppling thewhiteelite.The lawswere, ineffect,another racialbribe.AsWilliamJuliusWilsonhasnoted,“Aslongaspoorwhitesdirectedtheirhatredandfrustrationagainsttheblackcompetitor,theplanterswererelievedofclasshostilitydirectedagainstthem.”26Indeed,inordertoovercomethewell-foundedsuspicionsofpoorandilliteratewhitesthatthey,aswellasblacks,wereindangeroflosingtherighttovote,theleadersofthemovementpursuedanaggressivecampaignofwhitesupremacyineverystatepriortoblackdisenfranchisement.Ultimately,thePopulistscavedtothepressureandabandonedtheirformerallies.“Whilethe[Populist]

movementwasat thepeakofzeal,”Woodwardobserved,“the tworaceshadsurprisedeachotherandastonished their opponents by the harmony they achieved and the good will with which theycooperated.”27Butwhenitbecameclear that theconservativeswouldstopatnothing todecimate theiralliance, the biracial partnership dissolved, and Populist leaders realigned themselves withconservatives. EvenTomWatson,who had been among themost forceful advocates for an interracialallianceoffarmers,concludedthatPopulistprinciplescouldneverbefullyembracedbytheSouthuntilblackswereeliminatedfrompolitics.The agricultural depression, taken together with a series of failed reforms and broken political

promises,hadpyramidedtoaclimaxofsocialtensions.Dominantwhitesconcludedthatitwasintheirpoliticalandeconomicinteresttoscapegoatblacks,and“permissiontohate”camefromsourcesthathadformerlydeniedit,includingNorthernliberalseagertoreconcilewiththeSouth,Southernconservativeswho had once promised blacks protection from racial extremism, and Populists, who cast aside theirdark-skinnedallieswhenthepartnershipfellundersiege.28Historyseemedtorepeatitself.Justasthewhiteelitehadsuccessfullydrivenawedgebetweenpoor

whitesandblacksfollowingBacon’sRebellionbycreatingtheinstitutionofblackslavery,anotherracialcastesystemwasemergingnearlytwocenturieslater,inpartduetoeffortsbywhiteelitestodecimateamultiracialallianceofpoorpeople.Bytheturnofthetwentiethcentury,everystateintheSouthhadlawsonthebooksthatdisenfranchisedblacksanddiscriminatedagainsttheminvirtuallyeverysphereoflife,lendingsanctiontoaracialostracismthatextendedtoschools,churches,housing,jobs,restrooms,hotels,restaurants,hospitals,orphanages,prisons,funeralhomes,morgues,andcemeteries.Politicianscompetedwith each other by proposing and passing ever more stringent, oppressive, and downright ridiculouslegislation (such as laws specifically prohibiting blacks andwhites from playing chess together). Thepublicsymbolsandconstantremindersofblacksubjugationweresupportedbywhitesacrossthepoliticalspectrum, though theplightofpoorwhites remained largelyunchanged.For them, the racialbribewasprimarilypsychological.Thenewracialorder,knownasJimCrow—atermapparentlyderivedfromaminstrelshowcharacter

—wasregardedasthe“finalsettlement,”the“returntosanity,”and“thepermanentsystem.”29Ofcourse,the earlier system of racialized social control—slavery—had also been regarded as final, sane, andpermanentbyitssupporters.Liketheearliersystem,JimCrowseemed“natural,”anditbecamedifficulttorememberthatalternativepathswerenotonlyavailableatonetime,butnearlyembraced.

TheDeathofJimCrow

ScholarshavelongdebatedthebeginningandendofReconstruction,aswellasexactlywhenJimCrowended and the Civil Rights Movement or “Second Reconstruction” began. Reconstruction is mosttypicallydescribedasstretchingfrom1863whentheNorthfreedtheslavesto1877,whenitabandonedthemandwithdrewfederaltroopsfromtheSouth.ThereismuchlesscertaintyregardingthebeginningoftheendofJimCrow.ThegeneralpublictypicallytracesthedeathofJimCrowtoBrownv.BoardofEducation,althoughthe

institutionwas showing signs ofweakness years before.By 1945, a growing number ofwhites in theNorthhadconcluded that the JimCrowsystemwouldhave tobemodified, ifnotentirelyoverthrown.Thisconsensuswasduetoanumberoffactors,includingtheincreasedpoliticalpowerofblacksduetomigrationtotheNorthandthegrowingmembershipandinfluenceoftheNAACP,particularlyitshighlysuccessfullegalcampaignchallengingJimCrowlawsinfederalcourts.Farmoreimportantintheviewofmanyscholars,however,istheinfluenceofWorldWarII.Theblatantcontradictionbetweenthecountry’soppositiontothecrimesoftheThirdReichagainstEuropeanJewsandthecontinuedexistenceofaracialcastesystemintheUnitedStateswasprovingembarrassing,severelydamagingthenation’scredibilityasleaderof the“freeworld.”Therewasalso increasedconcernthat,withoutgreaterequalityforAfricanAmericans,blackswouldbecomesusceptibletocommunistinfluence,givenRussia’scommitmenttobothracial and economic equality. In Gunnar Myrdal’s highly influential book The American Dilemma,published in1944,Myrdalmadeapassionateplea for integrationbasedon the theory that the inherentcontradiction between the “American Creed” of freedom and equality and the treatment of AfricanAmericanswasnotonlyimmoralandprofoundlyunjust,butwasalsoagainsttheeconomicandforeign-policyinterestsoftheUnitedStates.30TheSupremeCourtseemedtoagree.In1944,inSmithv.Allwright,theSupremeCourtendedtheuse

of theall-whiteprimaryelection;and in1946, theCourt ruled that state laws requiring segregationoninterstatebuseswereunconstitutional.Twoyearslater,theCourtvoidedanyrealestateagreementsthatraciallydiscriminatedagainstpurchasers,andin1949theCourtruledthatTexas’ssegregatedlawschoolforblackswasinherentlyunequalandinferiorineveryrespecttoitslawschoolforwhites.In1950,inMcLaurinv.Oklahoma,itdeclaredthatOklahomahadtodesegregateitslawschool.Thus,evenbeforeBrown,theSupremeCourthadalreadybeguntosetinmotionastrikingpatternofdesegregation.Brownv.BoardofEducationwasunique,however. It signaled theendof “home rule” in theSouth

withrespecttoracialaffairs.Earlierdecisionshadchippedawayatthe“separatebutequal”doctrine,yetJimCrowhadmanagedtoadapttothechanginglegalenvironment,andmostSouthernershadremainedconfident that the institutionwouldsurvive.Brown threatenednotonly toabolish segregation inpublicschools,butalso,by implication, theentiresystemof legalizeddiscrimination in theSouth.AftermorethanfiftyyearsofnearlycompletedeferencetoSouthernstatesandnoninterferenceintheirracialaffairs,Brownsuggestedareversalincourse.A mood of outrage and defiance swept the South, not unlike the reaction to emancipation and

Reconstruction following theCivilWar.Again, racialequalitywasbeing forcedupon theSouthby thefederalgovernment,andby1956Southernwhiteoppositiontodesegregationmushroomedintoaviciousbacklash. In Congress, North Carolina Senator Sam Erwin Jr. drafted a racist polemic, “the SouthernManifesto,”whichvowedtofighttomaintainJimCrowbyalllegalmeans.Erwinsucceededinobtainingthesupportof101outof128membersofCongressfromtheelevenoriginalConfederatestates.AfreshwaveofwhiteterrorwashurledatthosewhosupportedthedismantlingofJimCrow.White

Citizens’CouncilswereformedinalmosteverySoutherncityandbackwatertown,comprisedprimarilyof middle-to upper-middle-class whites in business and the clergy. Just as Southern legislatures had

passed the black codes in response to the early steps of Reconstruction, in the years immediatelyfollowingBrown v. Board, five Southern legislatures passed nearly fifty new Jim Crow laws. In thestreets,resistanceturnedviolent.TheKuKluxKlanreasserteditselfasapowerfulterroristorganization,committing castrations, killings, and the bombing of black homes and churches.NAACP leaderswerebeaten,pistol-whipped,andshot.Asquicklyasitbegan,desegregationacrosstheSouthgroundtoahalt.In1958,thirteenschoolsystemsweredesegregated;in1960,onlyseventeen.31In the absence of amassive, grassrootsmovement directly challenging the racial caste system, Jim

Crowmightbealiveandwelltoday.Yetinthe1950s,acivilrightsmovementwasbrewing,emboldenedby theSupremeCourt’sdecisionsandashiftingdomesticand internationalpoliticalenvironment.Withextraordinarybravery,civilrightsleaders,activists,andprogressiveclergylaunchedboycotts,marches,andsit-insprotestingtheJimCrowsystem.Theyenduredfirehoses,policedogs,bombings,andbeatingsbywhitemobs,aswellasby thepolice.Onceagain, federal troopsweresent to theSouth toprovideprotectionforblacksattemptingtoexercisetheircivilrights,andtheviolentreactionofwhiteracistswasmetwithhorrorintheNorth.Thedramatic highpoint of theCivilRightsMovementoccurred in1963.TheSouthern strugglehad

grownfromamodestgroupofblackstudentsdemonstratingpeacefullyatonelunchcountertothelargestmassmovementforracialreformandcivilrightsinthetwentiethcentury.Betweenautumn1961andthespring of 1963, twenty thousandmen,women, and children had been arrested. In 1963 alone, anotherfifteenthousandwereimprisoned,andonethousanddesegregationprotestsoccurredacrosstheregion,inmorethanonehundredcities.32OnJune12,1963,PresidentKennedyannouncedthathewoulddelivertoCongressastrongcivilrights

bill, a declaration that transformed him into a widely recognized ally of the Civil RightsMovement.FollowingKennedy’sassassination,PresidentJohnsonprofessedhiscommitmenttothegoalof“thefullassimilation of more than twenty million Negroes into American life,” and ensured the passage ofcomprehensivecivilrightslegislation.TheCivilRightsActof1964formallydismantledtheJimCrowsystem of discrimination in public accommodations, employment, voting, education, and federallyfinancedactivities.TheVotingRightsActof1965arguablyhadevengreaterscope,asitrenderedillegalnumerousdiscriminatorybarrierstoeffectivepoliticalparticipationbyAfricanAmericansandmandatedfederalreviewofallnewvotingregulationssothatitwouldbepossibletodeterminewhethertheirusewouldperpetuatevotingdiscrimination.Withinfiveyears,theeffectsofthecivilrightsrevolutionwereundeniable.Between1964and1969,

the percentage ofAfricanAmerican adults registered to vote in theSouth soared. InAlabama the rateleaped from19.3percent to61.3percent; inGeorgia, 27.4percent to60.4percent; inLouisiana,31.6percentto60.8percent;andinMississippi,6.7percentto66.5percent.33Suddenlyblackchildrencouldshopindepartmentstores,eatatrestaurants,drinkfromwaterfountains,andgotoamusementparksthatwere once off-limits. Miscegenation laws were declared unconstitutional, and the rate of interracialmarriageclimbed.Whiledramaticprogresswasapparentinthepoliticalandsocialrealms,civilrightsactivistsbecame

increasinglyconcernedthat,withoutmajoreconomicreforms,thevastmajorityofblackswouldremainlockedinpoverty.ThusatthepeakoftheCivilRightsMovement,activistsandothersbegantoturntheirattentiontoeconomicproblems,arguingthatsocioeconomicinequalityinteractedwithracismtoproducecripplingpovertyandrelatedsocialproblems.Economicissuesemergedasamajorfocusofdiscontent.Aspolitical scientistsFrancesFoxPivenandRichardClowardhavedescribed, “blacksbecamemoreindignantover theircondition—notonlyasanoppressedracialminority inawhitesocietybutaspoorpeople in an affluent one.”34 Activists organized boycotts, picket lines, and demonstrations to attackdiscriminationinaccesstojobsandthedenialofeconomicopportunity.

PerhapsthemostfamousdemonstrationinsupportofeconomicjusticeistheMarchonWashingtonforJobs andEconomicFreedom inAugust 1963.Thewave of activism associatedwith economic justicehelped to focus President Kennedy’s attention on poverty and black unemployment. In the summer of1963,he initiatedaseriesofstaffstudiesonthosesubjects.Bytheendof thesummer,hedeclaredhisintentiontomaketheeradicationofpovertyakeylegislativeobjectivein1964.35FollowingKennedy’sassassination,PresidentLyndonJohnsonembracedtheantipovertyrhetoricwithgreatpassion,callingforan“unconditionalwaronpoverty,” inhisStateof theUnionAddress in January1964.Weeks laterheproposedtoCongresstheEconomicOpportunitiesBillof1964.Theshift infocusservedtoalignthegoalsof theCivilRightsMovementwithkeypoliticalgoalsof

poor and working-class whites, who were also demanding economic reforms. As the Civil RightsMovement began to evolve into a “Poor People’sMovement,” it promised to address not only blackpoverty,butwhitepovertyaswell—thusraisingthespecterofapoorandworking-classmovementthatcutacrossraciallines.MartinLutherKingJr.andothercivilrightsleadersmadeitclearthattheyviewedtheeradicationofeconomicinequalityasthenextfrontinthe“humanrightsmovement”andmadegreatefforts to buildmultiracial coalitions that sought economic justice for all. Genuine equality for blackpeople,Kingreasoned,demandedaradicalrestructuringofsociety,onethatwouldaddresstheneedsoftheblackandwhitepoorthroughoutthecountry.Shortlybeforehisassassination,heenvisionedbringingtoWashington,D.C.,thousandsofthenation’sdisadvantagedinaninterracialalliancethatembracedruraland ghetto blacks, Appalachian whites,Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Native Americans todemandjobsandincome—therighttolive.Inaspeechdeliveredin1968,Kingacknowledgedtherehadbeen someprogress for blacks since thepassageof theCivilRightsAct of 1964, but insisted that thecurrent challenges required even greater resolve and that the entire nation must be transformed foreconomicjusticetobemorethanadreamforpoorpeopleofallcolors.AshistorianGeraldMcKnightobserves,“KingwasproposingnothinglessthanaradicaltransformationoftheCivilRightsMovementintoapopulistcrusadecallingforredistributionofeconomicandpoliticalpower.America’sonlycivilrightsleaderwasnowfocusingonclassissuesandwasplanningtodescendonWashingtonwithanarmyofpoortoshakethefoundationsofthepowerstructureandforcethegovernmenttorespondtotheneedsoftheignoredunderclass.”36With thesuccessof theCivilRightsMovementand the launchingof thePoorPeople’sMovement, it

wasapparenttoallthatamajordisruptioninthenation’sracialequilibriumhadoccurred.Yetasweshallseebelow,Negroesstoodonlya“briefmoment in thesun.”Conservativewhitesbegan,onceagain, tosearchforanewracialorderthatwouldconformtotheneedsandconstraintsofthetime.Thisprocesstookplacewith theunderstanding thatwhatever theneworderwouldbe, itwouldhave tobeformallyrace-neutral—it could not involve explicit or clearly intentional race discrimination. A similarphenomenonhad followedslaveryandReconstruction,aswhiteelites struggled todefineanewracialorderwith the understanding thatwhatever the new orderwould be, it could not include slavery. JimCroweventuallyreplacedslavery,butnowittoohaddied,anditwasunclearwhatmighttakeitsplace.Barredbylawfrominvokingraceexplicitly,thosecommittedtoracialhierarchywereforcedtosearchfornewmeansofachievingtheirgoalsaccordingtothenewrulesofAmericandemocracy.History reveals that the seedsof thenewsystemof controlwereplantedwellbefore theendof the

Civil Rights Movement. A new race-neutral language was developed for appealing to old racistsentiments,alanguageaccompaniedbyapoliticalmovementthatsucceededinputtingthevastmajorityofblacks back in their place. Proponents of racial hierarchy found they could install a new racial castesystemwithoutviolatingthelaworthenewlimitsofacceptablepoliticaldiscourse,bydemanding“lawandorder”ratherthan“segregationforever.”

TheBirthofMassIncarceration

The rhetoric of “lawandorder”was firstmobilized in the late 1950s asSoutherngovernors and lawenforcementofficialsattemptedtogenerateandmobilizewhiteoppositiontotheCivilRightsMovement.IntheyearsfollowingBrownv.BoardofEducation,civilrightsactivistsuseddirect-actiontacticsinaneffort to force reluctant Southern states to desegregate public facilities. Southern governors and lawenforcement officials often characterized these tactics as criminal and argued that the rise of theCivilRightsMovementwasindicativeofabreakdownoflawandorder.SupportofcivilrightslegislationwasderidedbySouthernconservativesasmerely“rewardinglawbreakers.”Formorethanadecade—fromthemid-1950suntil the late1960s—conservativessystematicallyand

strategically linkedopposition tocivil rights legislation tocalls for lawandorder,arguing thatMartinLutherKing Jr.’s philosophyof civil disobediencewas a leading cause of crime.Civil rights protestswerefrequentlydepictedascriminalrather thanpolitical innature,andfederalcourtswereaccusedofexcessive “lenience” toward lawlessness, thereby contributing to the spread of crime. In thewords ofthen-VicePresidentRichardNixon,theincreasingcrimerate“canbetraceddirectlytothespreadofthecorrosivedoctrinethateverycitizenpossessesaninherentrighttodecideforhimselfwhichlawstoobeyandwhentodisobeythem.”37Somesegregationistswentfurther, insisting that integrationcausescrime,citing lowercrimerates inSouthernstatesasevidence thatsegregationwasnecessary. In thewordsofRepresentativeJohnBellWilliams,“ThisexodusofNegroesfromtheSouth,andtheirinfluxintothegreatmetropolitancentersofotherareasoftheNation,hasbeenaccompaniedbyawaveofcrime....Whathascivilrightsaccomplishedfortheseareas?...SegregationistheonlyanswerasmostAmericans—notthepoliticians—haverealizedforhundredsofyears.”38Unfortunately,atthesametimethatcivilrightswerebeingidentifiedasathreattolawandorder,the

FBIwas reporting fairly dramatic increases in the national crime rate.Despite significant controversyover theaccuracyof thestatistics, thesereports receivedagreatdealofpublicityandwereofferedasfurtherevidenceofthebreakdowninlawfulness,morality,andsocialstability.39Tomakemattersworse,riotseruptedinthesummerof1964inHarlemandRochester,followedbyaseriesofuprisingsthatsweptthenationfollowingtheassassinationofMartinLutherKingJr. in1968.Theracial imageryassociatedwith the riots gave fuel to the argument that civil rights for blacks led to rampant crime. Cities likePhiladelphia and Rochester were described as being victims of their own generosity. Conservativesargued that, havingwelcomed blacksmigrating from the South, these cities “were repaidwith crime-riddenslumsandblackdiscontent.”40BarryGoldwater,inhis1964presidentialcampaign,aggressivelyexploitedtheriotsandfearsofblack

crime, laying thefoundationfor the“get toughoncrime”movement thatwouldemergeyears later. Inawidelyquotedspeech,Goldwaterwarnedvoters,“Choosethewayof[theJohnson]Administrationandyou have the way of mobs in the street.”41 Civil rights activists who argued that the uprisings weredirectlyrelatedtowidespreadpoliceharassmentandabuseweredismissedbyconservativesoutofhand.“If [blacks]conduct themselves inanorderlyway, theywillnothave toworryaboutpolicebrutality,”arguedWestVirginiaSenatorRobertByrd.42Earlyon,littleeffortwasmadetodisguisetheracialmotivationsbehindthelawandorderrhetoricand

the harsh criminal justice legislation proposed inCongress. Themost ardent opponents of civil rightslegislation and desegregation were the most active on the emerging crime issue. Well-knownsegregationistGeorgeWallace,forexample,arguedthat“thesameSupremeCourtthatorderedintegrationandencouragedcivilrights legislation”wasnow“bendingoverbackwardstohelpcriminals.”43Threeotherprominentsegregationists—SenatorsMcClellan,Erwin,andThurmond—ledthelegislativebattleto

curbtherightsofcriminaldefendants.44Astherulesofacceptablediscoursechanged,however,segregationistsdistancedthemselvesfroman

explicitly racist agenda. They developed instead the racially sanitized rhetoric of “cracking down oncrime”—rhetoric that is now used freely by politicians of every stripe. Conservative politicianswhoembracedthisrhetoricpurposefullyfailedtodistinguishbetweenthedirectactiontacticsofcivilrightsactivists, violent rebellions in inner cities, and traditional crimes of an economic or violent nature.Instead, asMarcMauerof theSentencingProjecthasnoted, “allof thesephenomenonwere subsumedundertheheadingof‘crimeinthestreets.’”45AfterthepassageoftheCivilRightsAct,thepublicdebateshiftedfocusfromsegregationtocrime.The

battle lines, however, remained largely the same. Positions taken on crime policies typically coheredalonglinesofracialideology.PoliticalscientistVeslaWeaverexplains:“Votescastinoppositiontoopenhousing,busing, theCivilRightsAct,andothermeasurestimeandagainshowedthesamedivisionsasvotes for amendments to crime bills....Members ofCongresswho voted against civil rightsmeasuresproactivelydesignedcrimelegislationandactivelyfoughtfortheirproposals.”46Although lawandorder rhetoricultimately failed toprevent the formaldismantlingof theJimCrow

system, it proved highly effective in appealing to poor and working-class whites, particularly in theSouth,whowereopposedtointegrationandfrustratedbytheDemocraticParty’sapparentsupportfortheCivilRightsMovement.AsWeavernotes,“rather than fading, thesegregationists’crime-raceargumentwasreframed,withaslightlydifferentveneer,”andeventuallybecamethefoundationoftheconservativeagendaoncrime.47Infact,lawandorderrhetoric—firstemployedbysegregationists—wouldeventuallycontributetoamajorrealignmentofpoliticalpartiesintheUnitedStates.Following the Civil War, party alignment was almost entirely regional. The South was solidly

Democratic, embittered by thewar, firmly committed to themaintenance of a racial caste system, andextremelyhostiletofederalinterventiononbehalfofAfricanAmericans.TheNorthwasoverwhelmingRepublicanand,whileRepublicanswereambivalentaboutequalityforAfricanAmericans,theywerefarmoreinclinedtoadoptandimplementracialjusticereformsthantheirDemocraticcounterpartsbelowtheMason-Dixonline.TheGreatDepressioneffectuateda sea change inAmerican race relations andparty alignment.The

NewDeal—spearheadedbytheDemocraticPartyofPresidentFranklinD.Roosevelt—wasdesignedtoalleviatethesufferingofpoorpeopleinthemidstoftheDepression,andblacks,thepoorestofthepoor,benefited disproportionately. While New Deal programs were rife with discrimination in theiradministration, theyat least includedblackswithin thepoolofbeneficiaries—adevelopment,historianMichaelKlarmanhasnoted, thatwas“sufficient toraiseblackhopesandexpectationsafterdecadesofmalignneglectfromWashington.”48Poorandworking-classwhitesinboththeNorthandSouth,nolessthanAfricanAmericans,respondedpositivelytotheNewDeal,anxiousformeaningfuleconomicrelief.Asaresult,theDemocraticNewDealcoalitionevolvedintoanallianceofurbanethnicgroupsandthewhiteSouththatdominatedelectoralpoliticsfrom1932totheearly1960s.Thatdominancecametoanabruptendwith thecreationandimplementationofwhathascometobe

knownastheSouthernStrategy.Thesuccessoflawandorderrhetoricamongworking-classwhitesandtheintenseresentmentofracialreforms,particularlyintheSouth,ledconservativeRepublicananalyststobelievethata“newmajority”couldbecreatedbytheRepublicanParty,onethatincludedthetraditionalRepublican base, the white South, and half the Catholic, blue-collar vote of the big cities.49 Someconservativepoliticalstrategistsadmitted thatappealing to racial fearsandantagonismswascentral tothisstrategy,thoughithadtobedonesurreptitiously.H.R.Haldeman,oneofNixon’skeyadvisers,recallsthatNixon himself deliberately pursued a southern, racial strategy: “He [PresidentNixon] emphasizedthatyouhavetofacethefactthatthewholeproblemisreallytheblacks.Thekeyistodeviseasystemthat

recognizes thiswhilenotappearing to.”50Similarly, JohnEhrlichman, specialcounsel to thepresident,explainedtheNixonadministration’scampaignstrategyof1968inthisway:“We’llgoaftertheracists.”51In Ehrlichman’s view, “that subliminal appeal to the antiblack voter was always present in Nixon’sstatementsandspeeches.”52RepublicanstrategistKevinPhillipsisoftencreditedforofferingthemostinfluentialargumentinfavor

of a race-based strategy forRepublicanpolitical dominance in theSouth.He argued inThe EmergingRepublicanMajority, published in 1969, thatNixon’s successful presidential election campaign couldpoint thewaytowardlong-termpoliticalrealignmentandthebuildingofanewRepublicanmajority, ifRepublicans continued to campaign primarily on the basis of racial issues, using coded antiblackrhetoric.53 He argued that Southern white Democrats had become so angered and alienated by theDemocraticParty’ssupport forcivil rightsreforms,suchasdesegregationandbusing, that thosevoterscould be easily persuaded to switch parties if those racial resentments could be maintained.WarrenWeaver,aNewYorkTimes journalistwhoreviewed thebookupon its release,observed thatPhillips’sstrategylargelydependeduponcreatingandmaintainingaraciallypolarizedpoliticalenvironment.“Fullracialpolarization isanessential ingredientofPhillip’spoliticalpragmatism.Hewants toseeablackDemocraticparty,particularlyintheSouth,becausethiswilldriveintotheRepublicanpartypreciselythekindofanti-Negrowhiteswhowillhelpconstitutetheemergingmajority.Thisevenleadshimtosupportsome civil rights efforts.” 54 Appealing to the racism and vulnerability of working-class whites hadworkedtodefeatthePopulistsattheturnofthecentury,andagrowingnumberofconservativesbelievedthetacticshouldbeemployedagain,albeitinamoresubtlefashion.Thus in the late 1960s and early 1970s, two schools of thoughtwere offered to the general public

regarding race, poverty, and the social order. Conservatives argued that poverty was caused not bystructural factors related to race and classbut ratherby culture—particularlyblack culture.Thisviewreceived support from Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s now infamous report on the black family, whichattributedblackpoverty to ablack“subculture” and the “tangleofpathology” that characterized it.AsdescribedbysociologistKatherineBeckett,“The(alleged)misbehaviorsof thepoorwere transformedfromadaptations topoverty that had theunfortunate effect of reproducing it into character failings thataccountedforpovertyinthefirstplace.”55The“socialpathologies”ofthepoor,particularlystreetcrime,illegal drug use, and delinquency, were redefined by conservatives as having their cause in overlygenerousreliefarrangements.Black“welfarecheats”andtheirdangerousoffspringemerged,forthefirsttime,inthepoliticaldiscourseandmediaimagery.Liberals,bycontrast,insistedthatsocialreformssuchastheWaronPovertyandcivilrightslegislation

wouldget at the“root causes”ofcriminalbehaviorand stressed the social conditions thatpredictablygeneratecrime.LyndonJohnson,forexample,arguedduringhis1964presidentialcampaignagainstBarryGoldwater that antipoverty programswere, in effect, anticrime programs: “There is somethingmightywrongwhenacandidateforthehighestofficebemoansviolenceinthestreetsbutvotesagainsttheWaronPoverty,votesagainsttheCivilRightsActandvotesagainstmajoreducationalbillsthatcomebeforehimasalegislator.”56Competing images of the poor as “deserving” and “undeserving” became central components of the

debate.Ultimately,theracializednatureofthisimagerybecameacrucialresourceforconservatives,whosucceeded inusing lawandorder rhetoric in their effort tomobilize the resentmentofwhiteworking-classvoters,manyofwhomfeltthreatenedbythesuddenprogressofAfricanAmericans.AsexplainedbyThomasandMaryEdsallintheirinsightfulbookChainReaction,adisproportionateshareofthecostsofintegration and racial equality had been borne by lower-and lower-middle-class whites, who weresuddenly forced to compete on equal terms with blacks for jobs and status and who lived inneighborhoods adjoining black ghettos. Their children—not the children of wealthy whites—attended

schoolsmostlikelytofallunderbusingorders.Theaffluentwhiteliberalswhowerepressingthelegalclaimsofblacksandotherminorities“wereoftensheltered,intheirprivatelives,andlargelyimmunetothe costs of implementing minority claims.”57 This reality made it possible for conservatives tocharacterizethe“liberalDemocraticestablishment”asbeingoutoftouchwithordinaryworkingpeople—thusresolvingoneof thecentralproblemsfacingconservatives:howtopersuadepoorandworking-classvoterstojoininalliancewithcorporateinterestsandtheconservativeelite.By1968,81percentofthoserespondingtotheGallupPollagreedwiththestatementthat“lawandorderhasbrokendowninthiscountry,”andthemajorityblamed“Negroeswhostartriots”and“Communists.”58During the presidential election that year, both the Republican candidate, Richard Nixon, and the

independent segregationist candidate,GeorgeWallace,made “law and order” a central theme of theircampaigns, and together they collected 57 percent of the vote.59 Nixon dedicated seventeen speechessolelytothetopicoflawandorder,andoneofhistelevisionadsexplicitlycalledonvoterstorejectthelawlessnessofcivilrightsactivistsandembrace“order”intheUnitedStates.60Theadvertisementbeganwithfrighteningmusicaccompaniedbyflashingimagesofprotestors,bloodiedvictims,andviolence.Adeepvoicethensaid:

It is time for an honest look at the problem of order in theUnited States.Dissent is a necessaryingredientofchange,but ina systemofgovernment thatprovides forpeacefulchange, there isnocausethatjustifiesresorttoviolence.LetusrecognizethatthefirstrightofeveryAmericanistobefreefromdomesticviolence.SoIpledgetoyou,weshallhaveorderintheUnitedStates.

Attheendofthead,acaptiondeclared:“Thistime...votelikeyourwholeworlddependedonit...NIXON.”Viewinghisowncampaignad,Nixonreportedlyremarkedwithgleethatthead“hitsitrightonthenose.It’sallaboutthosedamnNegro-PuertoRicangroupsoutthere.”61Racehadbecome,yetagain,apowerfulwedge,breakingupwhathadbeenasolid liberalcoalition

basedoneconomicinterestsofthepoorandtheworkingandlower-middleclasses.Inthe1968election,race eclipsed class as the organizing principle ofAmerican politics, and by 1972, attitudes on racialissues rather than socioeconomic status were the primary determinant of voters’ political self-identification.Thelate1960sandearly1970smarkedthedramaticerosioninthebeliefamongworking-class whites that the condition of the poor, or those who fail to prosper, was the result of a faultyeconomicsystemthatneededtobechallenged.AstheEdsallsexplain,“thepittingofwhitesandblacksatthelowendoftheincomedistributionagainsteachotherintensifiedtheviewamongmanywhitesthattheconditionof life for thedisadvantaged—particularly fordisadvantagedblacks—is the responsibilityofthoseafflicted,andnottheresponsibilityofthelargersociety.”62Justasracehadbeenusedattheturnofthe century bySouthern elites to rupture class solidarity at the bottomof the income ladder, race as anationalissuehadbrokenuptheDemocraticNewDeal“bottom-up”coalition—acoalitiondependentonsubstantialsupportfromallvoters,whiteandblack,atorbelowthemedianincome.Theconservativerevolutionthat tookrootwithintheRepublicanPartyinthe1960sdidnotreachits

full development until the election of 1980. The decade preceding Ronald Reagan’s ascent to thepresidencywascharacterizedbypoliticalandsocialcrises,astheCivilRightsMovementwaspromptlyfollowedbyintensecontroversyovertheimplementationoftheequalityprinciple—especiallybusingandaffirmative action—aswell as dramaticpolitical clashesover theVietnamWar andWatergate.Duringthis period, conservatives gave lip service to the goal of racial equality but actively resisteddesegregation,busing,andcivil rightsenforcement.They repeatedly raised the issueofwelfare, subtlyframingitasacontestbetweenhardworking,blue-collarwhitesandpoorblackswhorefused towork.The not-so-subtle message to working-class whites was that their tax dollars were going to supportspecialprogramsforblackswhomostcertainlydidnotdeservethem.Duringthisperiod,Nixoncalled

for a “war on drugs”—an announcement that proved largely rhetorical as he declared illegal drugs“publicenemynumberone”withoutproposingdramaticshiftsindrugpolicy.Abacklashagainstblackswasclearlyinforce,butnoconsensushadyetbeenreachedregardingwhatracialandsocialorderwouldultimatelyemergefromtheseturbulenttimes.In his campaign for the presidency, Reagan mastered the “excision of the language of race from

conservativepublicdiscourse”and thusbuilton thesuccessofearlierconservativeswhodevelopedastrategyofexploitingracialhostilityorresentmentforpoliticalgainwithoutmakingexplicitreferencetorace.63 Condemning “welfare queens” and criminal “predators,” he rode into office with the strongsupport of disaffected whites—poor and working-class whites who felt betrayed by the DemocraticParty’sembraceofthecivilrightsagenda.Asonepoliticalinsiderexplained,Reagan’sappealderivedprimarilyfromtheideologicalfervoroftherightwingoftheRepublicanPartyand“theemotionaldistressofthosewhofearorresenttheNegro,andwhoexpectReagansomehowtokeephim‘inhisplace’oratleastecho theirownangerand frustration.”64Togreateffect,Reaganechoedwhite frustration in race-neutral terms through implicit racial appeals. His “colorblind” rhetoric on crime, welfare, taxes, andstates’ rightswasclearlyunderstoodbywhite (andblack)voters ashavinga racialdimension, thoughclaims to that effect were impossible to prove. The absence of explicitly racist rhetoric afforded theracialnatureofhiscodedappealsacertainplausibledeniability.Forexample,whenReagankickedoffhispresidentialcampaignat theannualNeshobaCountyFairnearPhiladelphia,Mississippi—the townwhere three civil rights activistsweremurdered in 1964—he assured the crowd “I believe in states’rights,” and promised to restore to states and local governments the power that properly belonged tothem.65Hiscriticspromptlyalleged thathewas signalinga racialmessage tohis audience, suggestingallegiancewith thosewho resisted desegregation, but Reagan firmly denied it, forcing liberals into aposition thatwouldsoonbecomefamiliar—arguing thatsomething is racistbut finding it impossible toproveintheabsenceofexplicitlyracistlanguage.Crimeandwelfarewere themajor themesofReagan’scampaign rhetoric.According to theEdsalls,

oneofReagan’sfavoriteandmost-often-repeatedanecdoteswasthestoryofaChicago“welfarequeen”with “80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards,” whose “tax-free income alone is over$150,000.”66 The term “welfare queen” became a not-so-subtle code for “lazy, greedy, black ghettomother.”Thefoodstampprogram,inturn,wasavehicletolet“somefellowaheadofyoubuyaT-bonesteak,”while “youwere standing in a checkout linewith your package of hamburger.”67 These highlyracialized appeals, targeted to poor and working-class whites, were nearly always accompanied byvehementpromisestobetougheroncrimeandtoenhancethefederalgovernment’sroleincombatingit.Reaganportrayedthecriminalas“astaringface—afacethatbelongstoafrighteningrealityofourtime:thefaceof thehumanpredator.”68Reagan’s raciallycodedrhetoricandstrategyprovedextraordinarilyeffective,as22percentofallDemocratsdefectedfromthepartytovoteforReagan.Thedefectionrateshotupto34percentamongthoseDemocratswhobelievedcivilrightsleaderswerepushing“toofast.”69Once elected, Reagan’s promise to enhance the federal government’s role in fighting crime was

complicatedbythefactthatfightingstreetcrimehastraditionallybeentheresponsibilityofstateandlocallawenforcement.AfteraperiodofinitialconfusionandcontroversyregardingwhethertheFBIandthefederalgovernmentshouldbeinvolvedinstreetcrime,theJusticeDepartmentannounceditsintentiontocutinhalfthenumberofspecialistsassignedtoidentifyandprosecutewhite-collarcriminalsandtoshiftits attention to street crime, especially drug-law enforcement.70 In October 1982, President Reaganofficiallyannouncedhisadministration’sWaronDrugs.Atthetimehedeclaredthisnewwar,lessthan2percentof theAmericanpublicvieweddrugsas themost important issue facing thenation.71This factwasnodeterrent toReagan,for thedrugwarfromtheoutsethadlittle todowithpublicconcernaboutdrugsandmuchtodowithpublicconcernaboutrace.Bywagingawarondrugusersanddealers,Reagan

madegoodonhispromisetocrackdownontheraciallydefined“others”—theundeserving.Practicallyovernightthebudgetsoffederallawenforcementagenciessoared.Between1980and1984,

FBI antidrug funding increased from $8 million to $95 million.72 Department of Defense antidrugallocationsincreasedfrom$33millionin1981to$1,042millionin1991.Duringthatsameperiod,DEAantidrugspendinggrewfrom$86to$1,026million,andFBIantidrugallocationsgrewfrom$38to$181million.73Bycontrast,fundingforagenciesresponsiblefordrugtreatment,prevention,andeducationwasdramaticallyreduced.ThebudgetoftheNationalInstituteonDrugAbuse,forexample,wasreducedfrom$274 million to $57 million from 1981 to 1984, and antidrug funds allocated to the Department ofEducationwerecutfrom$14millionto$3million.74Determinedtoensurethatthe“newRepublicanmajority”wouldcontinuetosupporttheextraordinary

expansionof the federal government’s law enforcement activities and thatCongresswould continue tofundit,theReaganadministrationlaunchedamediaoffensivetojustifytheWaronDrugs.75Centraltothemedia campaign was an effort to sensationalize the emergence of crack cocaine in inner-cityneighborhoods—communities devastated by deindustrialization and skyrocketing unemployment. ThemediafrenzythecampaigninspiredsimplycouldnothavecomeataworsetimeforAfricanAmericans.In theearly1980s, justas thedrugwarwaskickingoff, inner-citycommunitiesweresuffering from

economiccollapse.Theblue-collarfactoryjobsthathadbeenplentifulinurbanareasinthe1950sand1960s had suddenly disappeared.76 Prior to 1970, inner-city workers with relatively little formaleducationcouldfindindustrialemploymentclosetohome.Globalization,however,helpedtochangethat.Manufacturing jobs were transferred by multinational corporations away from American cities tocountriesthatlackedunions,whereworkersearnasmallfractionofwhatisconsideredafairwageintheUnitedStates.Tomakemattersworse,dramatic technological changes revolutionized theworkplace—changes that eliminatedmanyof the jobs that less skilledworkers once reliedupon for their survival.Highly educated workers benefited from the pace of technological change and the increased use ofcomputer-based technologies, but blue-collar workers often found themselves displaced in the suddentransitionfromanindustrialtoaserviceeconomy.The impact of globalization and deindustrialization was felt most strongly in black inner-city

communities. As described by William Julius Wilson, in his book When Work Disappears, theoverwhelmingmajorityofAfricanAmericans in the1970s lackedcollegeeducationsandhadattendedraciallysegregated,underfundedschools lackingbasicresources.Thoseresiding inghettocommunitieswereparticularlyillequippedtoadapttotheseismicchangestakingplaceintheU.S.economy;theywereleft isolated and jobless.One study indicates that as late as 1970,more than 70 percent of all blacksworkinginmetropolitanareasheldblue-collarjobs.77Yetby1987,whenthedrugwarhithighgear,theindustrialemploymentofblackmenhadplummetedto28percent.78Thenewmanufacturingjobsthatopenedduringthistimeperiodweregenerallylocatedinthesuburbs.

ThegrowingspatialmismatchofjobshadaprofoundimpactonAfricanAmericanstrappedinghettos.Astudyofurbanblackfathersfoundthatonly28percenthadaccesstoanautomobile.Theratefell to18percentforthoselivinginghettoareas.79Women fared somewhatbetterduring thisperiodbecause the social-service sector inurbanareas—

whichemploysprimarilywomen—wasexpandingatthesametimemanufacturingjobswereevaporating.Thefractionofblackmenwhomovedintosocalledpink-collarjobslikenursingorclericalworkwasnegligible.80Thedeclineinlegitimateemploymentopportunitiesamonginner-cityresidentsincreasedincentivesto

selldrugs—mostnotablycrackcocaine.Crackispharmacologicallyalmostidenticaltopowdercocaine,butithasbeenconvertedintoaformthatcanbevaporizedandinhaledforafaster,moreintense(thoughshorter) highusing lessof thedrug—making it possible to sell small doses atmore affordableprices.

Crackhitthestreetsin1985,afewyearsafterReagan’sdrugwarwasannounced,leadingtoaspikeinviolenceasdrugmarketsstruggledtostabilize,andtheangerandfrustrationassociatedwithjoblessnessboiled.JoblessnessandcracksweptinnercitiespreciselyatthemomentthatafiercebacklashagainsttheCivil Rights Movement was manifesting itself through theWar on Drugs. The Reagan administrationleapedat theopportunitytopublicizecrackcocaineininner-citycommunitiesinordertobuildsupportforitsnewwar.InOctober1985, theDEAsentRobertStutman toserveasdirectorof itsNewYorkCityofficeand

charged him with the responsibility of shoring up public support for the administration’s new war.Stutmandevelopedastrategyforimprovingrelationswiththenewsmediaandsoughttodrawjournalists’attentiontothespreadofcrackcocaine.AsStutmanrecountedyearslater:

TheagentswouldhearmegivehundredsofpresentationstothemediaasIattemptedtocallattentiontothedrugscourge.Iwastednotimeinpointingoutits[theDEA’s]newaccomplishmentsagainstthedrugtraffickers....InordertoconvinceWashington,Ineededtomakeit[drugs]anationalissueandquickly. I began a lobbying effort and I used the media. The media were only too willing tocooperate, because as far the New York media was concerned, crack was the hottest combatreportingstorytocomealongsincetheendoftheVietnamWar.81

The strategy bore fruit. In June 1986, Newsweek declared crack to be the biggest story sinceVietnam/Watergate, and in August of that year, Time magazine termed crack “the issue of the year.”Thousandsofstoriesabout thecrackcrisisfloodedtheairwavesandnewsstands,andthestorieshadaclear racial subtext. The articles typically featured black “crack whores,” “crack babies,” and“gangbangers,”reinforcingalreadyprevalentracialstereotypesofblackwomenasirresponsible,selfish“welfarequeens,”andblackmenas“predators”—partofaninferiorandcriminalsubculture.82Whentwopopular sports figures,LenBias andDonRogers, died of cocaine overdoses in June 1986, themediaerroneouslyreportedtheirdeathsascausedbycrack,contributingtothemediafirestormandgroundswellofpolitical activity andpublic concern relating to thenew“demondrug,” crackcocaine.Thebonanzacontinued into 1989, as the media continued to disseminate claims that crack was an “epidemic,” a“plague,”“instantlyaddictive,”andextraordinarilydangerous—claimsthathavenowbeenprovenfalseorhighlymisleading.BetweenOctober1988andOctober1989, theWashingtonPost alone ran 1,565storiesaboutthe“drugscourge.”RichardHarwood,thePost’sombudsmen,eventuallyadmittedthepaperhadlost“apropersenseofperspective”duetosucha“hyperboleepidemic.”Hesaidthat“politiciansaredoinganumberonpeople’sheads.”83SociologistsCraigReinarmanandHarryLevinelatermadeasimilar point: “Crackwas a god-send to theRight.... It could not have appeared at amore politicallyopportunemoment.”84InSeptember1986,withthemediafrenzyatfullthrottle,theHousepassedlegislationthatallocated$2

billion to the antidrug crusade, required the participation of the military in narcotics control efforts,allowedthedeathpenaltyforsomedrug-relatedcrimes,andauthorizedtheadmissionofsomeillegallyobtainedevidenceindrugtrials.Laterthatmonth,theSenateproposedeventougherantidruglegislation,andshortlythereafter,thepresidentsignedtheAntiDrugAbuseActof1986intolaw.Amongotherharshpenalties,thelegislationincludedmandatoryminimumsentencesforthedistributionofcocaine,includingfar more severe punishment for distribution of crack—associated with blacks—than powder cocaine,associatedwithwhites.Fewcriticismsofthelegislationcouldbeheardenroutetoenactment.Onesenatorinsistedthatcrack

hadbecomeascapegoatdistractingthepublic’sattentionfromthetruecausesofoursocialills,arguing:“Ifweblamecrimeoncrack,ourpoliticiansareoffthehook.Forgottenarethefailedschools,themalignwelfareprograms,thedesolateneighborhoods,thewastedyears.Onlycrackistoblame.Oneistemptedtothinkthatifcrackdidnotexist,someonesomewherewouldhavereceivedaFederalgranttodevelop

it.”85Criticalvoices,however,werelonelyones.Congress revisited drug policy in 1988. The resulting legislation was once again extraordinarily

punitive, this time extending far beyond traditional criminal punishments and including new “civilpenalties”fordrugoffenders.ThenewAntiDrugAbuseActauthorizedpublichousingauthoritiestoevictany tenant who allows any form of drug-related criminal activity to occur on or near public housingpremisesandeliminatedmany federalbenefits, includingstudent loans, foranyoneconvictedofadrugoffense.The act also expandeduseof thedeathpenalty for seriousdrug-relatedoffenses and imposednew mandatory minimums for drug offenses, including a five-year mandatory minimum for simplepossessionofcocainebase—withnoevidenceofintenttosell.Remarkably,thepenaltywouldapplytofirst-timeoffenders.Theseverityofthispunishmentwasunprecedentedinthefederalsystem.Until1988,oneyearofimprisonmenthadbeenthemaximumforpossessionofanyamountofanydrug.MembersoftheCongressionalBlackCaucus (CBC)weremixed in their assessment of the new legislation—somebelievingtheharshpenaltieswerenecessary,othersconvincedthatthelawswerebiasedandharmfultoAfricanAmericans.Ultimatelythelegislationpassedbyanoverwhelmingmargin—346to11.SixofthenegativevotescamefromtheCBC.86TheWaronDrugsprovedpopularamongkeywhitevoters,particularlywhiteswhoremainedresentful

ofblackprogress,civil rightsenforcement,andaffirmativeaction.Beginning in the1970s, researchersfoundthatracialattitudes—notcrimeratesorlikelihoodofvictimization—areanimportantdeterminantofwhitesupportfor“gettoughoncrime”andantiwelfaremeasures.87Amongwhites, thoseexpressingthehighestdegreeofconcernaboutcrimealsotendtoopposeracialreform,andtheirpunitiveattitudestowardcrimeare largelyunrelated to their likelihoodofvictimization.88Whites, on average, aremorepunitivethanblacks,despitethefactthatblacksarefarmorelikelytobevictimsofcrime.Ruralwhitesareoften themostpunitive,even though theyare least likely tobecrimevictims.89TheWaronDrugs,cloakedinrace-neutrallanguage,offeredwhitesopposedtoracialreformauniqueopportunitytoexpresstheirhostilitytowardblacksandblackprogress,withoutbeingexposedtothechargeofracism.Reagan’s successor, President George Bush Sr., did not hesitate to employ implicit racial appeals,

havinglearnedfromthesuccessofotherconservativepoliticiansthatsubtlenegativereferencestoracecouldmobilizepoorandworking-classwhiteswhooncewereloyaltotheDemocraticParty.Bush’smostfamousracialappeal,theWillieHortonad,featuredadark-skinnedblackman,aconvictedmurdererwhoescapedwhile on awork furlough and then raped andmurdered awhitewoman in her home.The adblamedBush’sopponent,Massachusetts governorMichaelDukakis, for thedeathof thewhitewoman,because he approved the furlough program. For months, the ad played repeatedly on network newsstations and was the subject of incessant political commentary. Though controversial, the ad wasstunninglyeffective;itdestroyedDukakis’schancesofeverbecomingpresident.Once in theOvalOffice,Bush stayed onmessage, opposing affirmative action and aggressive civil

rightsenforcement,andembracing thedrugwarwithgreatenthusiasm. InAugust1989,PresidentBushcharacterizeddruguseas“themostpressingproblemfacingthenation.”90Shortlythereafter,aNewYorkTimes/CBSNewsPollreportedthat64percentofthosepolled—thehighestpercentageeverrecorded—now thought that drugswere themost significant problem in theUnited States.91 This surge of publicconcerndidnotcorrespondtoadramaticshift in illegaldrugactivity,but insteadwas theproductofacarefullyorchestratedpoliticalcampaign.The levelofpublicconcernaboutcrimeanddrugswasonlyweaklycorrelatedwithactualcrimerates,buthighlycorrelatedwithpoliticalinitiatives,campaigns,andpartisanappeals.92Theshift toageneralattitudeof“toughness” towardproblemsassociatedwithcommunitiesofcolor

began in the 1960s, when the gains and goals of the Civil Rights Movement began to require realsacrificesonthepartofwhiteAmericans,andconservativepoliticiansfoundtheycouldmobilizewhite

racialresentmentbyvowingtocrackdownoncrime.Bythelate1980s,however,notonlyconservativesplayed leading roles in the get-tough movement, spouting the rhetoric once associated only withsegregationists.Democraticpoliticiansandpolicymakerswerenowattempting towrest controlof thecrime anddrug issues fromRepublicans by advocating stricter anticrime and antidrug laws—all in anefforttowinbacktheso-called“swingvoters”whoweredefectingtotheRepublicanParty.Somewhatironically,these“newDemocrats”werejoinedbyvirulentracists,mostnotablytheKuKluxKlan,whichannounced in1990 that it intended to“join thebattleagainst illegaldrugs”bybecoming the“eyesandearsofthepolice.”93Progressivesconcernedaboutracialjusticeinthisperiodweremostlysilentaboutthe War on Drugs, preferring to channel their energy toward defense of affirmative action and otherperceivedgainsoftheCivilRightsMovement.Intheearly1990s,resistancetotheemergenceofanewsystemofracializedsocialcontrolcollapsed

across thepoliticalspectrum.Acenturyearlier,asimilarpoliticaldynamichadresulted in thebirthofJimCrow.In the1890s,Populistsbuckledunder thepoliticalpressurecreatedby theRedeemers,whohadsuccessfullyappealedtopoorandworking-classwhitesbyproposingovertlyracistandincreasinglyabsurd Jim Crow laws. Now, a new racial caste system—mass incarceration—was taking hold, aspoliticiansofeverystripecompetedwitheachothertowinthevotesofpoorandworking-classwhites,whose economic status was precarious, at best, and who felt threatened by racial reforms. As hadhappened before, former allies ofAfricanAmericans—asmuch as conservatives—adopted a politicalstrategythatrequiredthemtoprovehow“tough”theycouldbeon“them,”thedark-skinnedpariahs.Theresultswereimmediate.Aslawenforcementbudgetsexploded,sodidprisonandjailpopulations.

In1991,theSentencingProjectreportedthatthenumberofpeoplebehindbarsintheUnitedStateswasunprecedentedinworldhistory,andthatonefourthofyoungAfricanAmericanmenwerenowunderthecontrolofthecriminaljusticesystem.Despitethejaw-droppingimpactofthe“gettough”movementontheAfricanAmericancommunity,neithertheDemocratsnortheRepublicansrevealedanyinclinationtoslowthepaceofincarceration.To the contrary, in 1992, presidential candidateBillClintonvowed that hewouldnever permit any

Republicantobeperceivedastougheroncrimethanhe.Truetohisword,justweeksbeforethecriticalNewHampshireprimary,ClintonchosetoflyhometoArkansastooverseetheexecutionofRickyRayRector,amentallyimpairedblackmanwhohadsolittleconceptionofwhatwasabouttohappentohimthatheaskedforthedessertfromhislastmealtobesavedforhimuntilthemorning.Aftertheexecution,Clintonremarked,“Icanbenickedalot,butnoonecansayI’msoftoncrime.”94Once elected, Clinton endorsed the idea of a federal “three strikes and you’re out” law, which he

advocatedinhis1994StateoftheUnionaddresstoenthusiasticapplauseonbothsidesoftheaisle.The$30billioncrimebillsenttoPresidentClintoninAugust1994washailedasavictoryfortheDemocrats,who“wereabletowrestthecrimeissuefromtheRepublicansandmakeittheirown.”95Thebillcreateddozens of new federal capital crimes, mandated life sentences for some three-time offenders, andauthorizedmorethan$16billionforstateprisongrantsandexpansionofstateandlocalpoliceforces.Farfrom resisting the emergence of the new caste system, Clinton escalated the drug war beyond whatconservativeshadimaginedpossibleadecadeearlier.AstheJusticePolicyInstitutehasobserved,“theClintonAdministration’s ‘toughoncrime’policies resulted in the largest increases in federalandstateprisoninmatesofanypresidentinAmericanhistory.”96Clintoneventuallymovedbeyondcrimeandcapitulatedtotheconservativeracialagendaonwelfare.

Thismove,likehis“gettough”rhetoricandpolicies,waspartofagrandstrategyarticulatedbythe“newDemocrats” to appeal to the elusive white swing voters. In so doing, Clinton—more than any otherpresident—created the current racial undercaste. He signed the Personal Responsibility and WorkOpportunityReconciliationAct,which“endedwelfareasweknowit,”andreplaceditwithablockgrant

to states calledTemporaryAssistance toNeedyFamilies (TANF).TANF imposeda five-year lifetimelimit on welfare assistance, as well as a permanent, lifetime ban on eligibility for welfare and foodstampsforanyoneconvictedofafelonydrugoffense—includingsimplepossessionofmarijuana.Clintondidnotstopthere.Determinedtoprovehow“tough”hecouldbeon“them,”Clintonalsomade

it easier for federally-assisted public housing projects to exclude anyonewith a criminal history—anextraordinarily harsh step in the midst of a drug war aimed at racial and ethnic minorities. In hisannouncementofthe“OneStrikeandYou’reOut”Initiative,Clintonexplained:“Fromnowon,theruleforresidentswhocommitcrimeandpeddledrugsshouldbeonestrikeandyou’reout.”97Thenewrulepromised to be “the toughest admission and eviction policy thatHUD has implemented.” 98 Thus, forcountless poor people, particularly racialminorities targeted by the drugwar, public housingwas nolongeravailable, leavingmanyof themhomeless—lockedoutnotonlyofmainstreamsociety,but theirownhomes.Thelawandorderperspective,firstintroducedduringthepeakoftheCivilRightsMovementbyrabid

segregationists, had become nearly hegemonic two decades later. By the mid-1990s, no seriousalternativestotheWaronDrugsand“gettough”movementwerebeingentertainedinmainstreampoliticaldiscourse.Onceagain,inresponsetoamajordisruptionintheprevailingracialorder—thistimethecivilrights gains of the 1960s—a new system of racialized social control was created by exploiting thevulnerabilities and racial resentments of poor and working-class whites.More than 2 million peoplefoundthemselvesbehindbarsattheturnofthetwenty-firstcentury,andmillionsmorewererelegatedtothemarginsofmainstreamsociety,banishedtoapoliticalandsocialspacenotunlikeJimCrow,wherediscriminationinemployment,housing,andaccesstoeducationwasperfectlylegal,andwheretheycouldbedeniedtherighttovote.Thesystemfunctionedrelativelyautomatically,andtheprevailingsystemofracialmeanings, identities, and ideologies already seemednatural.Ninetypercentof those admitted toprisonfordrugoffensesinmanystateswereblackorLatino,yetthemassincarcerationofcommunitiesofcolorwasexplainedinrace-neutralterms,anadaptationtotheneedsanddemandsofthecurrentpoliticalclimate.TheNewJimCrowwasborn.

2

TheLockdown

Wemaythinkweknowhowthecriminal justicesystemworks.Televisionisoverloadedwithfictionaldramasaboutpolice,crime,andprosecutors—showssuchasLaw&Order.Thesefictionaldramas,likethe evening news, tend to focus on individual stories of crime, victimization, and punishment, and thestories are typically told from the point of view of law enforcement. A charismatic police officer,investigator, or prosecutor struggles with his own demonswhile heroically trying to solve a horriblecrime.Heultimatelyachievesapersonalandmoralvictorybyfindingthebadguyandthrowinghiminjail. That is the made-for-TV version of the criminal justice system. It perpetuates the myth that theprimaryfunctionofthesystemistokeepourstreetssafeandourhomessecurebyrootingoutdangerouscriminals and punishing them. These television shows, especially those that romanticize drug-lawenforcement,arethemodern-dayequivalentoftheoldmoviesportrayinghappyslaves,thefictionalglossplacedonabrutalsystemofracializedoppressionandcontrol.Thosewhohavebeensweptwithinthecriminaljusticesystemknowthatthewaythesystemactually

worksbearslittleresemblancetowhathappensontelevisionorinmovies.Full-blowntrialsofguiltorinnocencerarelyoccur;manypeopleneverevenmeetwithanattorney;witnessesareroutinelypaidandcoercedbythegovernment;policeregularlystopandsearchpeoplefornoreasonwhatsoever;penaltiesformanycrimesaresoseverethatinnocentpeoplepleadguilty,acceptingpleabargainstoavoidharshmandatorysentences;andchildren,evenasyoungasfourteen,aresenttoadultprisons.Rulesoflawandprocedure,suchas“guiltbeyondareasonabledoubt”or“probablecause”or“reasonablesuspicion,”caneasilybefoundincourtcasesandlaw-schooltextbooksbutaremuchhardertofindinreallife.Inthischapter,weshallseehowthesystemofmassincarcerationactuallyworks.OurfocusistheWar

onDrugs.Thereasonissimple:Convictionsfordrugoffensesarethesinglemostimportantcauseoftheexplosion in incarceration rates in theUnitedStates.Drugoffensesaloneaccount for two-thirdsof theriseinthefederalinmatepopulationandmorethanhalfoftheriseinstateprisonersbetween1985and2000.1Approximatelyahalf-millionpeopleareinprisonorjailforadrugoffensetoday,comparedtoanestimated 41,100 in 1980—an increase of 1,100 percent.2Drug arrests have tripled since 1980.As aresult, more than 31 million people have been arrested for drug offenses since the drug war began.3NothinghascontributedmoretothesystematicmassincarcerationofpeopleofcolorintheUnitedStatesthantheWaronDrugs.Beforewebeginourtourofthedrugwar,itisworthwhiletogetacoupleofmythsoutoftheway.The

firstisthatthewarisaimedatriddingthenationofdrug“kingpins”orbig-timedealers.Nothingcouldbefurtherfromthetruth.Thevastmajorityofthosearrestedarenotchargedwithseriousoffenses.In2005,forexample, fouroutof fivedrugarrestswere forpossession,andonlyoneoutof fivewas for sales.Moreover,mostpeopleinstateprisonfordrugoffenseshavenohistoryofviolenceorsignificantsellingactivity.4The second myth is that the drug war is principally concerned with dangerous drugs. Quite to the

contrary,arrestsformarijuanapossession—adruglessharmfulthantobaccooralcohol—accountedfornearly80percentofthegrowthindrugarrestsinthe1990s.5Despitethefactthatmostdrugarrestsarefornonviolentminoroffenses,theWaronDrugshasusheredinaneraofunprecedentedpunitiveness.Thepercentageofdrugarreststhatresultinprisonsentences(ratherthandismissal,communityservice,

orprobation)hasquadrupled,resultinginaprison-buildingboomthelikesofwhichtheworldhasneverseen. In twoshortdecades,between1980and2000, thenumberofpeople incarcerated inournation’sprisonsandjailssoaredfromroughly300,000tomorethan2million.Bytheendof2007,morethan7millionAmericans—oroneinevery31adults—werebehindbars,onprobation,oronparole.6Webeginourexplorationofthedrugwaratthepointofentry—arrestbythepolice—andthenconsider

how the system of mass incarceration is structured to reward mass drug arrests and facilitate theconvictionand imprisonmentof anunprecedentednumberofAmericans,whetherguiltyor innocent. Insubsequent chapters, we will consider how the system specifically targets people of color and thenrelegatesthemtoasecond-classstatusanalogoustoJimCrow.Atthispoint,wesimplytakestockofthemeansbywhichtheWaronDrugsfacilitatestheroundupandlockdownofanextraordinarypercentageoftheU.S.population.

RulesoftheGame

Few legal rules meaningfully constrain the police in the War on Drugs. This may sound like anoverstatement, but upon examination it proves accurate. The absence of significant constraints on theexerciseofpolicediscretionisakeyfeatureofthedrugwar’sdesign.IthasmadetheroundupofmillionsofAmericansfornonviolentdrugoffensesrelativelyeasy.Withonlyafewexceptions,theSupremeCourthasseizedeveryopportunitytofacilitatethedrugwar,

primarilybyevisceratingFourthAmendmentprotectionsagainstunreasonablesearchesandseizuresbythe police. The rollback has been so pronounced that some commentators charge that a virtual “drugexception” now exists to the Bill of Rights. Shortly before his death, Justice ThurgoodMarshall feltcompelledtoremindhiscolleaguesthatthereis,infact,“nodrugexception”writtenintothetextoftheConstitution.7MostAmericansdonotknowwhattheFourthAmendmentoftheU.S.Constitutionactuallysaysorwhat

itrequiresofthepolice.Itstates,initsentirety:The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, againstunreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and nowarrants shall issue, but uponprobable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to besearched,andthepersonorthingstobeseized.

CourtsandscholarsagreethattheFourthAmendmentgovernsallsearchesandseizuresbythepoliceandthattheamendmentwasadoptedinresponsetotheEnglishpracticeofconductingarbitrarysearchesundergeneralwarrantstouncoverseditiouslibels.Theroutinepoliceharassment,arbitrarysearches,andwidespread police intimidation of those subject to English rule helped to inspire the AmericanRevolution.Notsurprisingly,then,preventingarbitrarysearchesandseizuresbythepolicewasdeemedbytheFoundingFathersanessentialelementoftheU.S.Constitution.UntiltheWaronDrugs,courtshadbeenfairlystringentaboutenforcingtheFourthAmendment’srequirements.Withinafewyearsafterthedrugwarwasdeclared,however,manylegalscholarsnotedasharpturnin

the Supreme Court’s Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. By the close of the Supreme Court’s 1990-91term,ithadbecomeclearthatamajorshiftintherelationshipbetweenthecitizensofthiscountryandthepolice was underway. Justice Stevens noted the trend in a powerful dissent issued in California v.Acevedo,acaseupholdingthewarrantlesssearchofabaglockedinamotorist’strunk:

In the years [from 1982 to 1991], the Court has heard argument in 30 Fourth Amendment casesinvolvingnarcotics.Inallbutone,thegovernmentwasthepetitioner.Allsavetwoinvolvedasearchorseizurewithoutawarrantorwithadefectivewarrant.And,inallexceptthree,theCourtupheldtheconstitutionalityofthesearchorseizure.Inthemeantime,theflowofnarcoticscasesthroughthecourtshassteadilyanddramaticallyincreased.NoimpartialobservercouldcriticizethisCourtforhinderingtheprogressofthewarondrugs.Onthecontrary,decisionsliketheonetheCourtmakestodaywillsupporttheconclusionthatthisCourthasbecomealoyalfootsoldierintheExecutive’sfightagainstcrime.8

TheFourthAmendmentisbutoneexample.Virtuallyallconstitutionallyprotectedcivillibertieshavebeenunderminedby thedrugwar.TheCourt has beenbusy in recent years approvingmandatorydrugtestingofemployeesandstudents,upholdingrandomsearchesandsweepsofpublicschoolsandstudents,permitting police to obtain search warrants based on an anonymous informant’s tip, expanding thegovernment’swiretapping authority, legitimating the use of paid, unidentified informants by police andprosecutors,approvingtheuseofhelicoptersurveillanceofhomeswithoutawarrant,andallowingthe

forfeitureofcash,homes,andotherpropertybasedonunprovenallegationsofillegaldrugactivity.Forourpurposeshere,welimitourfocustothelegalrulescraftedbytheSupremeCourtthatgrantlaw

enforcementapecuniaryinterestinthedrugwarandmakeitrelativelyeasyforthepolicetoseizepeoplevirtuallyanywhere—onpublicstreetsandsidewalks,onbuses,airplanesandtrains,oranyotherpublicplace—andusherthembehindbars.Thesenewlegalruleshaveensuredthatanyone,virtuallyanywhere,foranyreason,canbecomeatargetofdrug-lawenforcementactivity.

UnreasonableSuspicion

Onceuponatime,itwasgenerallyunderstoodthatthepolicecouldnotstopandsearchsomeonewithoutawarrantunlesstherewasprobablecausetobelievethattheindividualwasengagedincriminalactivity.Thatwas a basicFourthAmendment principle. InTerry v.Ohio, decided in 1968, the SupremeCourtmodified that understanding, but only modestly, by ruling that if and when a police officer observesunusual conduct by someone the officer reasonably believes to be dangerous and engaged in criminalactivity,theofficer“isentitledfortheprotectionofhimselfandothersinthearea”toconductalimitedsearch“todiscoverweaponsthatmightbeusedagainsttheofficer.”9Knownasthestop-and-friskrule,theTerrydecisionstandsforthepropositionthat,solongasapoliceofficerhas“reasonablearticulablesuspicion”thatsomeoneisengagedincriminalactivityanddangerous,itisconstitutionallypermissibletostop,question,andfriskhimorher—evenintheabsenceofprobablecause.Justice Douglas dissented in Terry on the grounds that “grant[ing] police greater power than a

magistrate[judge]istotakealongstepdownthetotalitarianpath.”10Heobjectedtothenotionthatpoliceshouldbefreetoconductwarrantlesssearcheswhenevertheysuspectsomeoneisacriminal,believingthat dispensingwith theFourthAmendment’swarrant requirement riskedopening thedoor to the sameabusesthatgaverisetotheAmericanRevolution.Hisvoicewasalonelyone.Mostcommentatorsatthetimeagreedthataffordingpolicethepoweranddiscretiontoprotectthemselvesduringanencounterwithsomeonetheybelievedtobeadangerouscriminalisnot“unreasonable”undertheFourthAmendment.History suggests Justice Douglas had the better of the argument. In the years since Terry, stops,

interrogations,andsearchesofordinarypeopledrivingdownthestreet,walkinghomefromthebusstop,orridingthetrain,havebecomecommonplace—atleastforpeopleofcolor.AsDouglassuspected,theCourt inTerryhadbegun its slidedownaveryslipperyslope.Today it isno longernecessary for thepolicetohaveanyreasontobelievethatpeopleareengagedincriminalactivityoractuallydangeroustostopandsearchthem.Aslongasyougive“consent,”thepolicecanstop,interrogate,andsearchyouforanyreasonornoreasonatall.

JustSayNo

ThefirstmajorsignthattheSupremeCourtwouldnotallowtheFourthAmendmenttointerferewiththeprosecutionof theWaronDrugscame inFloridav.Bostick. In that case,TerranceBostick, a twenty-eight-year-oldAfricanAmerican,hadbeensleepinginthebackseatofaGreyhoundbusonhiswayfromMiamitoAtlanta.Twopoliceofficers,wearingbrightgreen“raid” jacketsanddisplayingtheirbadgesandagun,wokehimwithastart.Thebuswasstoppedforabrief layover inFortLauderdale,andtheofficerswere“workingthebus,”lookingforpersonswhomightbecarryingdrugs.Bostickprovidedthemwith his identification and ticket, as requested. The officers then asked to search his bag. Bostickcomplied, even though he knew his bag contained a pound of cocaine. The officers had no basis forsuspectingBostickofanycriminalactivity,buttheygotlucky.TheyarrestedBostick,andhewaschargedandconvictedoftraffickingcocaine.Bostick’ssearchandseizurereflectedwhathadbecomeanincreasinglycommontacticintheWaron

Drugs:suspicionlesspolicesweepsofbusesininterstateorintrastatetravel.Theresulting“interviews”of passengers in these dragnet operations usually culminate in a request for “consent” to search thepassenger’s luggage.11Neverdo theofficers informpassengers that theyare free to remainsilentor torefusetoanswerquestions.Byproceedingsystematicallyinthismanner,thepoliceareabletoengageinanextremelyhighvolumeofsearches.Oneofficerwasabletosearchoverthreethousandbagsinanine-monthperiodemployingthesetechniques.12Byandlarge,however,thehitratesarelow.Forexample,inonecase,asweepofonehundredbusesresultedinonlysevenarrests.13Onappeal,theFloridaSupremeCourtruledinBostick’scasethatthepoliceofficer’sconductviolated

theFourthAmendment’sprohibitionofunreasonablesearchesandseizures.TheFourthAmendment,thecourt reasoned, forbids thepolicefromseizingpeopleandsearching themwithoutsomeindividualizedsuspicion that they have committed or are committing a crime. The court thus overturned Bostick’sconviction, ruling that the cocaine, having been obtained illegally, was inadmissible. It also broadlycondemned“bussweeps”inthedrugwar,comparingthemtomethodsemployedbytotalitarianregimes:

Theevidenceinthiscasehasevokedimagesofotherdays,underotherflags,whennomantraveledhis nation’s roads or railways without fear of unwarranted interruption, by individuals who hadtemporarypowerinGovernment....ThisisnotHitler’sBerlin,norStalin’sMoscow,norisitwhitesupremacist South Africa. Yet in Broward County, Florida, these police officers approach everypersononboardbusesandtrains(“thattimepermits”)andcheckidentification,tickets,asktosearchluggage—allinthenameof“voluntarycooperation”withlawenforcement.14

TheU.S.SupremeCourtreversed.TheCourtruledthatBostick’sencounterwiththepolicewaspurelyvoluntary, and therefore he was not “seized” within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Even ifBostickdidnotfeelfreetoleavewhenconfrontedbypoliceatthebackofthebus,theproperquestion,according to theCourt,waswhether “a reasonableperson” inBostick’s shoeswouldhave felt free toterminatetheencounter.Areasonableperson,theCourtconcluded,wouldhavefeltfreetositthereandrefusetoanswerthepoliceofficer’squestions,andwouldhavefeltfreetotelltheofficer“No,youcan’tsearch my bag.” Accordingly, Bostick was not really “seized” within the meaning of the FourthAmendment,andthesubsequentsearchwaspurelyconsensual.TheCourtmadeclearthatitsdecisionwastogovernallfuturedrugsweeps,nomatterwhatthecircumstancesofthetargetedindividual.Giventheblanketnatureof theruling,courtshavefoundpoliceencounters tobeconsensual in trulypreposteroussituations.Forexample,afewyearsafterBostick,theDistrictofColumbiaCourtofAppealsappliedtherulingtoacaseinvolvingafourteen-year-oldgirlinterrogatedbythepolice,concludingthatshemustbeheldtothesamereasonable-personstandard.15

PriortotheBostickdecision,anumberoflowercourtshadfoundabsurdthenotionthat“reasonablepeople”wouldfeelempoweredtorefusetoanswerquestionswhenconfrontedbythepolice.Asfederaljudge Prentiss Marshall explained, “The average person encountered will feel obliged to stop andrespond.Fewwillfeel that theycanwalkawayorrefusetoanswer.”16ProfessorTraceyMaclinput itthisway:“Commonsense teaches thatmostofusdonothave thechutzpahorstupidity to tellapoliceofficerto‘getlost’afterhehasstoppedusandaskedusforidentificationorquestionedusaboutpossiblecriminalconduct.”17Other courts emphasized that grantingpolice the freedom to stop, interrogate, andsearch anyonewho consentedwould likely lead to racial and ethnic discrimination.Young blackmenwouldbethelikelytargets,ratherthanolderwhitewomen.JusticeThurgoodMarshallacknowledgedasmuchinhisdissentinBostick,noting“thebasisofthedecisiontosingleoutparticularpassengersduringasuspicionlesssweepislesslikelytobeinarticulablethanunspeakable.”18StudieshaveshownthatMaclin’scommonsenseiscorrect:theoverwhelmingmajorityofpeoplewho

are confrontedbypolice andaskedquestions respond, andwhenasked tobe searched, they comply.19This is thecaseevenamong those, likeBostick,whohaveevery reason to resist these tacticsbecausethey actually have something to hide. This is no secret to the Supreme Court. The Court long agoacknowledged that effective use of consent searches by the police depends on the ignorance (andpowerless-ness) of thosewho are targeted. InSchneckloth v.Bustamonte, decided in 1973, theCourtadmittedthatifwaiverofone’srighttorefuseconsentweretruly“knowing,intelligent,andvoluntary,”itwould“inpracticecreateseriousdoubtwhetherconsentsearcheswouldcontinuetobeconducted.”20 Inotherwords,consentsearchesarevaluabletoolsforthepoliceonlybecausehardlyanyonedarestosayno.

PoorExcuse

So-calledconsentsearcheshavemadeitpossibleforthepolicetostopandsearchfordrugsjustaboutanybodywalking down the street. All a police officer has to do in order to conduct a baseless druginvestigationisasktospeakwithsomeoneandthengettheir“consent”tobesearched.Solongasordersare phrased as a question, compliance is interpreted as consent. “May I speak to you?” thunders anofficer. “Will you put your arms up and stand against thewall for a search?”Because almost no onerefuses,drugsweepsonthesidewalk(andonbusesandtrains)areeasy.Peopleareeasily intimidatedwhen the police confront them, hands on their revolvers, andmost have no idea the question can beanswered,“No.”Butwhataboutallthepeopledrivingdownthestreet?Howdopoliceextractconsentfromthem?Theanswer:pretextstops.Like consent searches, pretext stops are favorite tools of law enforcement in theWar onDrugs. A

classic pretext stop is a traffic stop motivated not by any desire to enforce traffic laws, but insteadmotivatedbyadesire tohunt fordrugs in theabsenceofanyevidenceof illegaldrugactivity. Inotherwords, police officers useminor traffic violations as an excuse—apretext—to search for drugs, eventhoughthereisnotashredofevidencesuggestingthemotoristisviolatingdruglaws.Pretextstops,likeconsentsearches,havereceivedtheSupremeCourt’sunequivocalblessing.JustaskMichaelWhrenandJamesBrown.WhrenandBrown,bothofwhomareAfricanAmerican,werestoppedbyplainclothesofficersinan

unmarkedvehicleinJune1993.ThepoliceadmittedtostoppingWhrenandBrownbecausetheywantedtoinvestigatethemforimagineddrugcrimes,eventhoughtheydidnothaveprobablecauseorreasonablesuspicion such crimes had actually been committed. Lacking actual evidence of criminal activity, theofficersdecidedtostopthembasedonapretext—atrafficviolation.Theofficerstestifiedthatthedriverfailedtousehisturnsignalandacceleratedabruptlyfromastopsign.Althoughtheofficersweren’treallyinterestedinthetrafficviolation,theystoppedthepairanywaybecausetheyhada“hunch”theymightbedrugcriminals.Itturnedouttheywereright.Accordingtotheofficers,thedriverhadabagofcocaineinhislap—allegedlyinplainview.Onappeal,WhrenandBrownchallengedtheirconvictionsonthegroundthatpretextualstopsviolate

theFourthAmendment.They argued that, because of themultitude of applicable traffic and equipmentregulations, and the difficulty of obeying all traffic rules perfectly at all times, the policewill nearlyalwayshaveanexcusetostopsomeoneandgofishingfordrugs.Anyonedrivingmorethanafewblocksislikelytocommitatrafficviolationofsomekind,suchasfailingtotrackproperlybetweenlanes,failingtostopatpreciselythecorrectdistancebehindacrosswalk,failingtopauseforpreciselytherightamountof time at a stop sign, or failing to use a turn signal at the appropriate distance from an intersection.Allowing thepolice touseminor trafficviolationsas apretext forbaselessdrug investigationswouldpermit them to single out anyone for a drug investigationwithout any evidence of illegal drug activitywhatsoever.ThatkindofarbitrarypoliceconductispreciselywhattheFourthAmendmentwasintendedtoprohibit.The SupremeCourt rejected their argument, ruling that an officer’smotivations are irrelevantwhen

evaluatingthereasonablenessofpoliceactivityundertheFourthAmendment.Itdoesnotmatter,theCourtdeclared,why thepoliceare stoppingmotoristsunder theFourthAmendment, so longas somekindoftrafficviolationgivesthemanexcuse.Thefact that theFourthAmendmentwasspecificallyadoptedbytheFoundingFatherstopreventarbitrarystopsandsearcheswasdeemedunpersuasive.TheCourtruledthat thepoliceare free touseminor trafficviolationsasapretext toconductdrug investigations, evenwhenthereisnoevidenceofillegaldrugactivity.Afewmonthslater,inOhiov.Robinette,theCourttookitstwistedlogiconestepfurther.Inthatcase,a

policeofficerpulledoverRobertRobinette,allegedly forspeeding.AftercheckingRobinette’s licenseand issuingawarning(butno ticket), theofficer thenorderedRobinetteoutofhisvehicle, turnedonavideocameraintheofficer’scar,andthenaskedRobinettewhetherhewascarryinganydrugsandwould“consent” toasearch.Hedid.Theofficer foundasmallamountofmarijuana inRobinette’scar,andasinglepill,whichturnedouttobemethamphetamine.TheOhioSupremeCourt,reviewingthecaseonappeal,wasobviouslyuncomfortablewiththeblatant

fishingexpeditionfordrugs.ThecourtnotedthattrafficstopswereincreasinglybeingusedintheWaronDrugstoextract“consent”forsearches,andthatmotoristsmaynotbelievetheyarefreetorefuseconsentand simply drive away. In an effort to provide someminimal protection formotorists, theOhio courtadoptedabright-linerule,thatis,anunambiguousrequirementthatofficerstellmotoriststheyarefreetoleavebeforeaskingforconsenttosearchtheirvehicles.Attheveryleast,thejusticesreasoned,motoristsshouldknowtheyhavetherighttorefuseconsentandtoleave,iftheysochoose.TheU.S.SupremeCourt struckdown this basic requirement as “unrealistic.” In sodoing, theCourt

made clear to all lower courts that, from now on, the FourthAmendment should place nomeaningfulconstraintsonthepoliceintheWaronDrugs.Nooneneedstobeinformedoftheirrightsduringastoporsearch,andpolicemayuseminortrafficstopsaswellasthemythof“consent”tostopandsearchanyonetheychooseforimaginarydrugcrimes,whetherornotanyevidenceofillegaldrugactivityactuallyexists.Onemightimaginethatthelegalrulesdescribedthusfarwouldprovidemorethanenoughlatitudefor

thepolicetoengageinanall-out,no-holds-barredwarondrugs.Butthere’smore.Evenifmotorists,afterbeingdetainedandinterrogated,havethenervetorefuseconsenttoasearch,thepolicecanarrestthemanyway.InAtwaterv.CityofLagoVista,theSupremeCourtheldthatthepolicemayarrestmotoristsforminortrafficviolationsandthrowtheminjail(evenifthestatutorypenaltyforthetrafficviolationisamerefine,notjailtime).Anotherlegaloptionforofficersfrustratedbyamotorist’srefusaltogrant“consent”istobringadrug-

sniffingdogtothescene.Thisoptionisavailabletopoliceintrafficstops,aswellastolawenforcementofficialsconfrontedwithresistanttravelersinairportsandinbusortrainstationswhorefusetogivethepolice consent to search their luggage. The SupremeCourt has ruled thatwalking a drug-sniffing dogaroundsomeone’svehicle(orsomeone’sluggage)doesnotconstitutea“search,”andthereforedoesnottrigger FourthAmendment scrutiny.21 If the dog alerts to drugs, then the officer has probable cause tosearchwithouttheperson’sconsent.Naturally,inmostcases,whensomeoneistoldthatadrug-sniffingdogwill be called, the seized individual backs down and “consents” to the search, as it has becomeapparentthatthepolicearedeterminedtoconductthesearchonewayoranother.

KissingFrogs

Courtcasesinvolvingdrug-lawenforcementalmostalwaysinvolveguiltypeople.Policeusuallyreleasetheinnocentonthestreet—oftenwithoutaticket,citation,orevenanapology—sotheirstoriesarerarelyheard in court. Hardly anyone files a complaint, because the last thing most people want to do afterexperiencingafrighteningandintrusiveencounterwiththepoliceisshowupatthepolicestationwherethe officerworks and attractmore attention to themselves. For good reason,many people—especiallypoorpeopleofcolor—fearpoliceharassment,retaliation,andabuse.Afterhavingyourcartornapartbythepolice in a futile search fordrugs,orbeing forced to lie spread-eagledon thepavementwhile thepolice search you and interrogate you for no reason at all, howmuch confidence do you have in lawenforcement?Doyouexpecttogetafairhearing?Thosewhotrytofindanattorneytorepresenttheminalawsuit often learn that unless they have broken bones (and no criminal record), private attorneys areunlikelytobeinterestedintheircase.Manypeopleareshockedtodiscoverthatwhathappenedtothemonthesideoftheroadwasnot,infact,againstthelaw.The inevitable result is that the peoplewhowind up in front of a judge are usually guilty of some

crime.TheparadeofguiltypeoplethroughAmerica’scourtroomsgivesthefalseimpressiontothepublic—aswellastojudges—thatwhenthepolicehavea“hunch,”itmakessensetoletthemactonit.Judgestend to imagine the police have a sixth sense—or some kind of special police training—that qualifiesthemtoidentifydrugcriminalsintheabsenceofanyevidence.Afterall,theyseemtoberightsomuchofthetime,don’tthey?The truth, however, is that most people stopped and searched in the War on Drugs are perfectly

innocentofanycrime.Thepolicehavereceivednotrainingthatenhancesthelikelihoodtheywillspotthedrugcriminalsastheydrivebyandleaveeveryoneelsealone.Tothecontrary,tensofthousandsoflawenforcementofficershavereceivedtrainingthatguaranteespreciselytheopposite.TheDrugEnforcementAgency (DEA) trains police to conduct utterly unreasonable and discriminatory stops and searchesthroughouttheUnitedStates.PerhapsthebestknownofthesetrainingprogramsisOperationPipeline.TheDEAlaunchedOperation

Pipelinein1984aspartoftheReaganadministration’srolloutoftheWaronDrugs.Thefederalprogram,administeredbyoverthreehundredstateandlocallawenforcementagencies,trainsstateandlocallawenforcement officers to use pretextual traffic stops and consent searches on a large scale for druginterdiction.Officerslearn,amongotherthings,howtouseaminortrafficviolationasapretexttostopsomeone, how to lengthen a routine traffic stop and leverage it into a search for drugs, how to obtainconsentfromareluctantmotorist,andhowtousedrug-sniffingdogstoobtainprobablecause.22By2000,theDEAhaddirectlytrainedmorethan25,000officersinforty-eightstatesinPipelinetacticsandhelpedtodeveloptrainingprogramsforcountlessmunicipalandstatelawenforcementagencies.InlegalscholarRicardoBascuas’swords,“OperationPipelineisexactlywhattheFramersmeanttoprohibit:afederally-rungeneralsearchprogramthattargetspeoplewithoutcauseforsuspicion,particularlythosewhobelongtodisfavoredgroups.”23Theprogram’s success requires police to stop “staggering” numbers of people in shotgun fashion.24

This“volume”approach todrugenforcement sweepsupextraordinarynumbersof innocentpeople.AsoneCaliforniaHighwayPatrolOfficersaid,“It’ssheernumbers....You’vegottokissalotoffrogsbeforeyoufindaprince.”25Accordingly,everyyear,tensofthousandsofmotoristsfindthemselvesstoppedonthesideoftheroad,fieldingquestionsaboutimaginarydrugactivity,andthensuccumbingtoarequestfortheir vehicle to be searched—sometimes torn apart—in the search for drugs.Most of these stops andsearchesarefutile.Ithasbeenestimatedthat95percentofPipelinestopsyieldnoillegaldrugs.26One

studyfoundthatupto99percentoftrafficstopsmadebyfederallyfundednarcoticstaskforcesresultinnocitationand that98percentof task-force searchesduring traffic stops arediscretionary searches inwhichtheofficersearchesthecarwiththedriver’sverbal“consent”buthasnootherlegalauthoritytodoso.27The“drug-courierprofiles”utilizedbytheDEAandotherlawenforcementagenciesfordrugsweeps

onhighways,aswellasinairportsandtrainstations,arenotoriouslyunreliable.Intheory,adrug-courierprofilereflects thecollectivewisdomandjudgmentofa lawenforcementagency’sofficials. Insteadofallowing each officer to rely on his or her own limited experience and biases in detecting suspiciousbehavior,adrug-courierprofileaffordseveryofficertheadvantageoftheagency’scollectiveexperienceandexpertise.However,aslegalscholarDavidColehasobserved,“inpractice,thedrug-courierprofileisascattershothodgepodgeoftraitsandcharacteristicssoexpansivethatitpotentiallyjustifiesstoppinganybody and everybody.”28 The profile can include traveling with luggage, traveling without luggage,drivinganexpensivecar,drivingacarthatneedsrepairs,drivingwithout-of-statelicenseplates,drivingarentalcar,drivingwith“mismatchedoccupants,”actingtoocalm,actingtoonervous,dressingcasually,wearingexpensiveclothingorjewelry,beingoneofthefirsttodeplane,beingoneofthelasttodeplane,deplaning in the middle, paying for a ticket in cash, using large-denomination currency, using small-denominationcurrency,travelingalone,travelingwithacompanion,andsoon.Evenstrivingtoobeythelawfitstheprofile!TheFloridaHighwayPatrolDrugCourierProfilecautionedtrooperstobesuspiciousof“scrupulousobediencetotrafficlaws.”29AsColepointsout,“suchprofilesdonotsomuchfocusaninvestigation as provide law enforcement officials a ready-made excuse for stoppingwhom-ever theyplease.”30The Supreme Court has allowed use of drug-courier profiles as guides for the exercise of police

discretion.Althoughithasindicatedthatthemerefactthatsomeonefitsaprofiledoesnotautomaticallyconstitutereasonablesuspicionjustifyingastop,courtsroutinelydefertotheseprofiles,andtheCourthasyettoobject.Asonejudgesaidafterconductingareviewofdrug-courierprofiledecisions:“Manycourtshave accepted the profile, as well as the Drug Enforcement Agency’s scattershot enforcement efforts,unquestioningly,mechanistically,anddispositively.”31

ItPaystoPlay

Clearly, the rules of the game are designed to allow for the roundup of an unprecedented number ofAmericans for minor, nonviolent drug offenses. The number of annual drug arrests more than tripledbetween 1980 and 2005, as drug sweeps and suspicionless stops and searches proceeded in recordnumbers.32Still,itisfairtowonderwhythepolicewouldchoosetoarrestsuchanastonishingpercentageofthe

Americanpublicforminordrugcrimes.Thefactthatpolicearelegallyallowedtoengageinawholesaleroundup of nonviolent drug offenders does not answer the questionwhy theywould choose to do so,particularlywhenmostpolicedepartmentshavefarmoreseriouscrimestopreventandsolve.Whywouldpoliceprioritizedrug-lawenforcement?Druguseandabuseisnothingnew;infact,itwasonthedecline,notontherise,whentheWaronDrugsbegan.Sowhymakedrug-lawenforcementaprioritynow?Onceagain,theanswerliesinthesystem’sdesign.Everysystemofcontroldependsforitssurvivalon

the tangible and intangible benefits that are provided to those who are responsible for the system’smaintenanceandadministration.Thissystemisnoexception.Atthetimethedrugwarwasdeclared,illegaldruguseandabusewasnotapressingconcerninmost

communities.TheannouncementofaWaronDrugswasthereforemetwithsomeconfusionandresistancewithinlawenforcement,aswellasamongsomeconservativecommentators.33Thefederalizationofdrugcrimeviolatedtheconservativetenetofstates’rightsandlocalcontrol,asstreetcrimewastypicallytheresponsibilityof local lawenforcement.Manystateand local lawenforcementofficialswere less thanpleasedwiththeattemptbythefederalgovernmenttoassertitselfinlocalcrimefighting,viewingthenewdrugwarasanunwelcomedistraction.Participation in thedrugwar requiredadiversionof resourcesawayfrommoreseriouscrimes,suchasmurder,rape,grandtheft,andviolentassault—allofwhichwereoffargreaterconcerntomostcommunitiesthanillegaldruguse.TheresistancewithinlawenforcementtothedrugwarcreatedsomethingofadilemmafortheReagan

administration.Inorderforthewartoactuallywork—thatis,inorderforittosucceedinachievingitspoliticalgoals—itwasnecessarytobuildaconsensusamongstateandlocallawenforcementagenciesthatthedrugwarshouldbeatoppriorityintheirhometowns.Thesolution:cash.Hugecashgrantsweremadetothoselawenforcementagenciesthatwerewillingtomakedrug-lawenforcementatoppriority.Thenewsystemofcontrol is traceable, toasignificantdegree, toamassivebribeoffered tostateandlocallawenforcementbythefederalgovernment.In1988,atthebehestoftheReaganadministration,Congressrevisedtheprogramthatprovidesfederal

aid to law enforcement, renaming it the Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law EnforcementAssistanceProgramafteraNewYorkCitypoliceofficerwhowasshottodeathwhileguardingthehomeofadrug-casewitness.TheByrneprogramwasdesigned toencourageeveryfederalgrant recipient tohelpfighttheWaronDrugs.Millionsofdollarsinfederalaidhavebeenofferedtostateandlocallawenforcementagencieswillingtowagethewar.Thisfederalgrantmoneyhasresultedintheproliferationofnarcoticstaskforces,includingthoseresponsibleforhighwaydruginterdiction.Nationally,narcoticstaskforcesmakeupabout40percentofallByrnegrantfunding,butinsomestatesasmuchas90percentofallByrnegrantfundsgotowardspecializednarcoticstaskforces.34Infact,itisquestionablewhetheranyspecializeddrugenforcementactivitywouldexistinsomestateswithouttheByrneprogram.Otherformsofvaluableaidhavebeenofferedaswell.TheDEAhasofferedfreetraining,intelligence,

andtechnicalsupporttostatehighwaypatrolagenciesthatarewillingtocommittheirofficerstohighwaydruginterdiction.ThePentagon,foritspart,hasgivenawaymilitaryintelligenceandmillionsofdollarsinfirepowertostateandlocalagencieswillingtomaketherhetoricalwaraliteralone.Almost immediately after the federal dollars began to flow, law enforcement agencies across the

country began to compete for funding, equipment, and training. By the late 1990s, the overwhelmingmajority of state and local police forces in the countryhad availed themselves of thenewly availableresourcesandaddedasignificantmilitarycomponenttobuttresstheirdrug-waroperations.Accordingtothe Cato Institute, in 1997 alone, the Pentagon handed over more than 1.2 million pieces of militaryequipmenttolocalpolicedepartments.35Similarly,theNationalJournal reported thatbetweenJanuary1997andOctober1999,theagencyhandled3.4millionordersofPentagonequipmentfromovereleventhousanddomesticpoliceagenciesinallfiftystates.Includedinthebountywere“253aircraft(includingsix-and seven-passenger airplanes,UH-60Blackhawk andUH-1Huey helicopters, 7,856M-16 rifles,181grenadelaunchers,8,131bulletproofhelmets,and1,161pairsofnight-visiongoggles.”36Aretiredpolice chief in New Haven, Connecticut, told the New York Times, “I was offered tanks, bazookas,anythingIwanted.”37

WagingWar

Inbarelyadecade,theWaronDrugswentfrombeingapoliticalslogantoanactualwar.Nowthatpolicedepartments were suddenly flush with cash and military equipment earmarked for the drug war, theyneeded tomake use of their new resources.As described in aCato Institute report, paramilitary units(mostcommonlycalledSpecialWeaponsandTactics,orSWAT,teams)werequicklyformedinvirtuallyeverymajorcitytofightthedrugwar.38SWATteamsoriginated in the1960sandgraduallybecamemorecommon in the1970s,butuntil the

drugwar,theywereusedrarely,primarilyforextraordinaryemergencysituationssuchashostagetakings,hijackings,orprisonescapes.Thatchangedinthe1980s,whenlocallawenforcementagenciessuddenlyhadaccesstocashandmilitaryequipmentspecificallyforthepurposeofconductingdrugraids.Today, the most common use of SWAT teams is to serve narcotics warrants, usually with forced,

unannouncedentryintothehome.Infact,insomejurisdictionsdrugwarrantsareservedonlybySWATteams—regardless of the nature of the alleged drug crime. As theMiami Herald reported in 2002,“Policesaytheywant[SWATteams]incaseofahostagesituationoraColumbine-typeincident,butinpractice the teamsareusedmainly to serve searchwarrantson suspecteddrugdealers.Someof thesesearchesyieldaslittleasafewgramsofcocaineormarijuana.”39The rateof increase in theuseofSWATteamshasbeenastonishing. In1972, therewere justa few

hundred paramilitary drug raids per year in the United States. By the early 1980s, there were threethousandannualSWATdeployments,by1996 therewere thirty thousand,andby2001 therewerefortythousand.40TheescalationofmilitaryforcewasquitedramaticincitiesthroughouttheUnitedStates.Inthe city ofMinneapolis,Minnesota, for example, its SWAT teamwas deployed on no-knockwarrantsthirty-five times in 1986, but in 1996 that same team was deployed for drug raids more than sevenhundredtimes.41DrugraidsconductedbySWATteamsarenotpoliteencounters.Incountlesssituationsinwhichpolice

couldeasilyhavearrestedsomeoneorconductedasearchwithoutamilitary-styleraid,policeblastintopeople’shomes,typicallyinthemiddleofthenight,throwinggrenades,shouting,andpointinggunsandriflesatanyoneinside,oftenincludingyoungchildren.Inrecentyears,dozensofpeoplehavebeenkilledby police in the course of these raids, including elderly grandparents and those who are completelyinnocentofanycrime.CriminologistPeterKraskareportsthatbetween1989and2001atleast780casesofflawedparamilitaryraidsreachedtheappellatelevel,adramaticincreaseoverthe1980s,whensuchcaseswererare,orearlier,whentheywerenonexistent.42Manyofthesecasesinvolvepeoplekilledinbotchedraids.AlbertaSpruill,afifty-seven-year-oldcityworkerfromHarlem,isamongthefallen.OnMay16,2003,

adozenNewYorkCitypoliceofficersstormedherapartmentbuildingonano-knockwarrant,actingonatipfromaconfidentialinformantwhotoldthemaconvictedfelonwassellingdrugsonthesixthfloor.Theinformanthadactuallybeeninjailatthetimehesaidhe’dboughtdrugsintheapartment,andthetargetoftheraidhadbeenarrestedfourdaysbefore,but theofficersdidn’tcheckanddidn’teveninterviewthebuildingsuperintendent.TheonlyresidentinthebuildingwasAlberta,describedbyfriendsasa“devoutchurchgoer.”Before entering, police deployed a flash-bang grenade, resulting in a blinding, deafeningexplosion.Albertawentintocardiacarrestanddiedtwohourslater.Thedeathwasruledahomicidebutnoonewasindicted.ThosewhosurviveSWATraidsaregenerallytraumatizedbytheevent.NotlongafterSpruill’sdeath,

ManhattanBorough President C.Virginia Fields held hearings on SWAT practices inNewYorkCity.According to theVillageVoice, “Dozens of black andLatino victims—nurses, secretaries, and former

officers—packedherchambersairingtales,onemorehorrifyingthanthenext.Mostwereunabletoholdbacktearsastheydescribedpoliceransackingtheirhomes,handcuffingchildrenandgrandparents,puttingguns to their heads, and being verbally (and often physically) abusive. In many cases, victims hadreceivednofollow-upfromtheNYPD,eventofixbusteddoorsorotherphysicaldamage.”43Eveninsmalltowns,suchasthoseinDodgeCounty,Wisconsin,SWATteamstreatroutinesearchesfor

narcoticsasamajorbattlefrontinthedrugwar.InDodgeCounty,policeraidedthemobilehomeofScottBryant inApril 1995, after finding traces ofmarijuana in his garbage.Moments after busting into themobile home, police shot Bryant—who was unarmed—killing him. Bryant’s eight-year-old son wasasleepinthenextroomandwatchedhisfatherdiewhilewaitingforanambulance.Thedistrictattorneytheorized that the shooter’s hand had clenched in “sympathetic physical reaction” as his other handreached for handcuffs. A spokesman for the Beretta company called this unlikely because the gun’sdouble-action triggerwasdesigned topreventunintentional firing.TheDodgeCountysheriffcomparedtheshootingtoahuntingaccident.44SWATraidshavenotbeen limited tohomes,apartmentbuildings,orpublichousingprojects.Public

high schools have been invaded by SWAT teams in search of drugs. InNovember 2003, for example,police raided Stratford High School in Goose Creek, South Carolina. The raid was recorded by theschool’ssurveillancecamerasaswellasapolicecamera.Thetapesshowstudentsasyoungasfourteenforced to theground inhandcuffsasofficers inSWATteamuniformsandbulletproofvestsaimgunsattheir heads and lead adrug-sniffingdog to tear through their bookbags.The raidwas initiatedby theschool’s principal,whowas suspicious that a single studentmight be dealingmarijuana.No drugs orweaponswerefoundduringtheraidandnochargeswerefiled.Nearlyallofthestudentssearchedandseizedwerestudentsofcolor.Thetransformationfrom“communitypolicing”to“militarypolicing,”beganin1981,whenPresident

Reagan persuaded Congress to pass the Military Cooperation with Law Enforcement Act, whichencouraged the military to give local, state, and federal police access to military bases, intelligence,research,weaponry,andotherequipmentfordruginterdiction.ThatlegislationcarvedahugeexceptiontothePosseComitatusAct,theCivilWar-eralawprohibitingtheuseofthemilitaryforcivilianpolicing.ItwasfollowedbyReagan’sNationalSecurityDecisionDirective,whichdeclareddrugsathreat toU.S.national security, and provided for yet more cooperation between local, state, and federal lawenforcement. In the years that followed, Presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton enthusiasticallyembracedthedrugwarandincreasedthetransferofmilitaryequipment,technology,andtrainingtolocallawenforcement,contingent,ofcourse,onthewillingnessofagenciestoprioritizedrug-lawenforcementandconcentrateresourcesonarrestsforillegaldrugs.The incentives program worked. Drug arrests skyrocketed, as SWAT teams swept through urban

housing projects, highwaypatrol agencies organized drug interdiction units on the freeways, and stop-and-friskprogramsweresetlooseonthestreets.Generally,thefinancialincentivesofferedtolocallawenforcementtopumpuptheirdrugarrestshavenotbeenwellpublicized,leadingtheaveragepersontoconclude reasonably (butmistakenly) thatwhen their local police departments report that drug arrestshavedoubledortripledinashortperiodoftime,thearrestsreflectasurgeinillegaldrugactivity,ratherthananinfusionofmoneyandanintensifiedenforcementeffort.Oneexceptionisa2001reportbytheCapitalTimesinMadison,Wisconsin.TheTimesreportedthat

asof2001,sixty-fiveofthestate’seighty-threelocalSWATteamshadcomeintobeingsince1980,andthattheexplosionofSWATteamswastraceabletothePentagon’sweaponrygiveawayprogram,aswellas to federal programs that provide money to local police departments for drug control. The paperexplainedthat,inthe1990s,Wisconsinpolicedepartmentsweregivennearlyahundredthousandpiecesof military equipment. And although the paramilitary units were often justified to city councils andskepticalcitizensasessentialtofightterrorismordealwithhostagesituations,theywererarelydeployed

forthosereasonsbutinsteadweresenttoserveroutinesearchwarrantsfordrugsandmakedrugarrests.In fact, the Times reported that police departments had an extraordinary incentive to use their newequipmentfordrugenforcement:theextrafederalfundingthelocalpolicedepartmentsreceivedwastiedtoantidrugpolicing.Thesizeofthedisbursementswaslinkedtothenumberofcityorcountydrugarrests.Eacharrest,intheory,wouldnetagivencityorcountyabout$153instateandfederalfunding.Non-drug-relatedpolicingbrought no federal dollars, even for violent crime.As a result,when JacksonCounty,Wisconsin,quadrupleditsdrugarrestsbetween1999and2000,thecounty’sfederalsubsidyquadrupledtoo.45

FindersKeepers

As if the freemilitaryequipment, training,andcashgrantswerenotenough, theReaganadministrationprovidedlawenforcementwithyetanotherfinancialincentivetodevoteextraordinaryresourcestodruglawenforcement,ratherthanmoreseriouscrimes:stateandlocallawenforcementagenciesweregrantedtheauthoritytokeep,fortheirownuse,thevastmajorityofcashandassetstheyseizewhenwagingthedrugwar.Thisdramaticchange inpolicygavestateand localpoliceanenormousstake in theWaronDrugs—notinitssuccess,butinitsperpetualexistence.Lawenforcementgainedapecuniaryinterestnotonlyintheforfeitedproperty,butintheprofitabilityofthedrugmarketitself.Moderndrugforfeiturelawsdatebackto1970,whenCongresspassedtheComprehensiveDrugAbuse

PreventionandControlAct.TheActincludedacivilforfeitureprovisionauthorizingthegovernmenttoseize and forfeit drugs, drugmanufacturing and storage equipment, and conveyances used to transportdrugs.AslegalscholarsEricBlumensonandEvaNilsenhaveexplained,theprovisionwasjustifiedasan effort “to forestall the spread of drugs in a way criminal penalties could not—by striking at itseconomicroots.”46Whenadrugdealerissenttojail,therearemanyothersreadyandwillingtotakehisplace, but seizing the means of production, some legislators reasoned, may shut down the traffickingbusiness forgood.Over theyears, the list ofproperties subject to forfeiture expandedgreatly, and therequired connection to illegal drug activity became increasingly remote, leading tomany instances ofabuse. But it was not until 1984, when Congress amended the federal law to allow federal lawenforcementagenciestoretainanduseanyandallproceedsfromassetforfeitures,andtoallowstateandlocalpoliceagenciestoretainupto80percentoftheassets’value,thatatruerevolutionoccurred.Suddenly,policedepartmentswerecapableofincreasingthesizeoftheirbudgets,quitesubstantially,

simplybytakingthecash,cars,andhomesofpeoplesuspectedofdruguseorsales.Atthetimethenewruleswereadopted,thelawgoverningcivilforfeiturewassoheavilyweightedinfavorofthegovernmentthat fully 80 percent of forfeitureswent uncontested. Property or cash could be seized based onmeresuspicionofillegaldrugactivity,andtheseizurecouldoccurwithoutnoticeorhearing,uponanexparteshowingofmereprobablecausetobelievethatthepropertyhadsomehowbeen“involved”inacrime.Theprobablecauseshowingcouldbebasedonnothingmore thanhearsay, innuendo,oreven thepaid,self-servingtestimonyofsomeonewithinterestsclearlyadversetothepropertyowner.Neithertheownerofthepropertynoranyoneelseneedbechargedwithacrime,muchlessfoundguiltyofone.Indeed,aperson could be found innocent of any criminal conduct and the property could still be subject toforfeiture.Oncethepropertywasseized,theownerhadnorightofcounsel,andtheburdenwasplacedonhim to prove the property’s “innocence.”Because thosewhowere targetedwere typically poor or ofmoderatemeans,theyoftenlackedtheresourcestohireanattorneyorpaytheconsiderablecourtcosts.Asaresult,mostpeoplewhohadtheircashorpropertyseizeddidnotchallengethegovernment’saction,especiallybecausethegovernmentcouldretaliatebyfilingcriminalcharges—baselessornot.Notsurprisingly,thisdrugforfeitureregimeprovedhighlylucrativeforlawenforcement,offeringmore

thanenoughincentivetowagetheWaronDrugs.AccordingtoareportcommissionedbytheDepartmentof Justice, between 1988 and 1992 alone, Byrne-funded drug task forces seized over $1 billion inassets.47Remarkably, this figuredoesnot includedrug task forces fundedby theDEAorother federalagencies.Theactualoperationofdrugforfeiturelawsseriouslyunderminestheusualrhetoricofferedinsupport

oftheWaronDrugs,namelythatitisthebig“kingpins”thatarethetargetofthewar.Drug-warforfeiturelawsarefrequentlyusedtoallowthosewithassetstobuytheirfreedom,whiledrugusersandsmall-timedealerswithfewassetstotradearesubjectedtolengthyprisonterms.InMassachusetts,forexample,aninvestigationbyjournalistsfoundthatonaveragea“paymentof$50,000indrugprofitswona6.3year

reduction in a sentence for dealers,” while agreements of $10,000 or more bought elimination orreductionoftraffickingchargesinalmostthree-fourthsofsuchcases.48Federaldrugforfeiturelawsareonereason,BlumensonandNielsennote,“whystateandfederalprisonsnowconfine largenumbersofmenandwomenwhohadrelativelyminorrolesindrugdistributionnetworks,butfewoftheirbosses.”49

TheShakedown

Quitepredictably, the enormous economic rewards createdbyboth thedrug-war forfeiture andByrne-grant laws has created an environment in which a very fine line exists between the lawful and theunlawful taking of other people’smoney and property—a line so thin that some officers disregard theformalitiesofsearchwarrants,probablecause,andreasonablesuspicionaltogether.InUnitedStatesv.Reese,forexample,theNinthCircuitCourtofAppealsdescribedadrugtaskforcecompletelycorruptedby its dependence on federal drug money. Operating as a separate unit within the Oakland HousingAuthority,thetaskforcebehaved,inthewordsofoneofficer,“moreorlesslikeawolfpack,”drivingupinpolicevehiclesandtaking“anythingandeverythingwesawonthestreetcorner.”50Theofficerswereundertremendouspressurefromtheircommandertokeeptheirarrestnumbersup,andalloftheofficerswere aware that their jobs depended on the renewal of a federal grant. The task force commanderemphasizedthattheywouldneedstatisticstoshowthatthegrantmoneywaswellspentandsentthetaskforceout tobeginashiftwithcomments like,“Let’sgooutandkickass,”and“Everybodygoes to jailtonightforeverything,right?”51Journalistsandinvestigatorshavedocumentednumerousother instances inwhichpolicedepartments

haveengagedinillegalshakedowns,searches,andthreatsinsearchofforfeitablepropertyandcash.InFlorida,reportersreviewednearlyonethousandvideotapesofhighwaytrafficstopsandfoundthatpolicehad used traffic violations as an excuse—or pretext—to confiscate “tens of thousands of dollars frommotorists againstwhom there [was] no evidence ofwrongdoing,” frequently taking themoneywithoutfilinganycriminalcharges.52Similarly,inLouisiana,journalistsreportedthatLouisianapoliceengagedinmassivepretextualstops inaneffort toseizecash,with themoneydiverted topolicedepartmentskitrips and other unauthorized uses.53 And in Southern California, a Los Angeles Sheriff’s Departmentemployeereportedthatdeputiesroutinelyplanteddrugsandfalsifiedpolicereportstoestablishprobablecauseforcashseizures.54Lotsofsmallseizurescanbenearlyasprofitable,andrequiretheexpenditureoffewerinvestigative

resources,thanafewlargebusts.TheWesternAreaNarcoticsTaskForce(WANT)becamethefocusofamajor investigation in 1996 when almost $66,000 was discovered hidden in its headquarters. Theinvestigationrevealedthatthetaskforceseizedlargeamountsofmoney,butalsosmallamounts,andthendispensed it freely,unconstrainedby reporting requirementsor the task force’smission.Someseizureswere as small as eight cents. Another seizure of ninety-three cents prompted the local newspaper toobservethat“onceagaintheofficersweretakingwhateverthesuspectswerecarrying,eventhoughbynostretchcouldpocketchangebeconstruedtobedrugmoney.”55In2000,CongresspassedtheCivilAssetForfeitureReformActwhichwasmeanttoaddressmanyof

the egregious examplesof abuseof civil forfeiture.Someof themostwidely cited examples involvedwealthywhiteswhosepropertywasseized.Onehighlypublicizedcaseinvolvedareclusivemillionaire,Donald Scott, who was shot and killed when a multiagency task force raided his two-hundred-acreMaliburanchpurportedlyinsearchofmarijuanaplants.Theyneverfoundasinglemarijuanaplantinthecourseofthesearch.AsubsequentinvestigationrevealedthattheprimarymotivationfortheraidwasthepossibilityofforfeitingScott’sproperty.Iftheforfeiturehadbeensuccessful,itwouldhavenettedthelawenforcementagenciesabout$5millioninassets.56 Inanothercase,WilliamMunnerlynnhadhisLearjetseizedbytheDEAafterheinadvertentlyusedittotransportadrugdealer.Thoughchargesweredroppedagainst himwithin seventy-two hours, theDEA refused to return his Learjet. Only after five years oflitigationandtensofthousandsofdollarsinlegalfeeswasheabletosecurereturnofhisjet.Whenthejetwas returned, it had sustained $100,000 worth of damage. 57 Such cases were atypical but got the

attentionofCongress.TheReformActresultedinanumberofsignificantdue-processchanges,suchasshiftingtheburdenof

proof onto the government, eliminating the requirement that an owner post a cost bond, and providingsomeminimal hardshipprotections for innocent partieswho stand to lose their homes.These reforms,however,donotgonearlyfarenough.Arguably the most significant reform is the creation of an “innocent owner” defense. Prior to the

Reform Act, the Supreme Court had ruled that the guilt or innocence of the property’s owner wasirrelevanttotheproperty’sguilt—arulingbasedonthearchaiclegalfictionthatapieceofpropertycouldbe“guilty”of a crime.Theact remedied this insanity to someextent; itprovidesan“innocentowner”defense to thosewhosepropertyhasbeenseized.However, thedefense isseriouslyunderminedbythefact that the government’s burden of proof is so low—the government need only establish by a“preponderanceoftheevidence”thatthepropertywasinvolvedinthecommissionofadrugcrime.Thisstandardofproofissignificantlylowerthanthe“clearandconvincingevidence”standardcontainedinanearlierversionofthelegislation,anditisfarlowerthanthe“proofbeyondareasonabledoubt”standardforcriminalconvictions.Oncethegovernmentmeetsthisminimalburden,theburdenthenshiftstotheownertoprovethatshe

“didnotknowof theconductgivingrise to theforfeiture”or thatshedid“all thatreasonablycouldbeexpectedunderthecircumstancestoterminatesuchuseoftheproperty.”Thismeans,forexample,thatawoman who knew that her husband occasionally smoked pot could have her car forfeited to thegovernmentbecausesheallowedhimtousehercar.Becausethe“car”wasguiltyoftransportingsomeonewhohadbrokenadrug lawat some time, shecould legally loseheronly formof transportation, eventhoughsheherselfcommittednocrime.Indeed,womenwhoareinvolvedinsomerelationshipwithmenaccused of drug crimes, typically husbands or boyfriends, are among the most frequent claimants inforfeiture proceedings.58 Courts have not been forgiving of women in these circumstances, frequentlyconcludingthat“thenatureandcircumstancesofthemaritalrelationshipmaygiverisetoaninferenceofknowledgebythespouseclaiminginnocentownership.”59There are other problems with this framework, not the least of which being that the owner of the

property isnotentitled to theappointmentofcounsel in the forfeitureproceeding,unlessheor shehasbeenchargedwithacrime.Theoverwhelmingmajorityof forfeiturecasesdonot involveanycriminalcharges, so the vast majority of people who have their cash, cars, or homes seized must representthemselvesincourt,againstthefederalgovernment.Oddly,someonewhohasactuallybeenchargedwithacrimeisentitledtotheappointmentofcounselincivilforfeitureproceedings,butthosewhosepropertyhas been forfeited but whose conduct did not merit criminal charges are on their own. This helps toexplainwhyup to90percentof forfeiturecases insome jurisdictionsarenotchallenged.Mostpeoplesimply cannot afford the considerable cost of hiring an attorney. Even if the cost is not an issue, theincentivesareallwrong.Ifthepoliceseizedyourcarworth$5,000,ortook$500cashfromyourhome,wouldyoubewillingtopayanattorneymorethanyourassetsareworthtogetthemback?Ifyouhaven’tbeenchargedwithacrime,areyouwillingtoriskthepossibilitythatfightingtheforfeituremightpromptthegovernmenttofilecriminalchargesagainstyou?ThegreatestfailureoftheReformAct,however,hasnothingtodowithone’sdueprocessrightsonce

property has been seized in a drug investigation. Despite all of the new procedural rules and formalprotections,thelawdoesnotaddressthesinglemostseriousproblemassociatedwithdrug-warforfeiturelaws:theprofitmotiveindrug-lawenforcement.Underthenewlaw,drugbustsmotivatedbythedesiretoseizecash,cars,homes,andotherpropertyarestillperfectly legal.Lawenforcementagenciesarestillallowed,throughrevenue-sharingagreementswiththefederalgovernment,tokeepseizedassetsfortheirownuse.Clearly,solongaslawenforcementisfreetoseizeassetsallegedlyassociatedwithillegaldrugactivity—without ever charging anyone with a crime—local police departments, as well as state and

federallawenforcementagencies,willcontinuetohaveadirectpecuniaryinterestintheprofitabilityandlongevityofthedrugwar.Thebasicstructureofthesystemremainsintact.Noneofthisistosuggestthatthefinancialrewardsofferedforpoliceparticipationinthedrugwarare

theonlyreasonthatlawenforcementdecidedtoembracethewarwithzeal.Undoubtedly,thepoliticalandcultural context of the drug war—particularly in the early years—encouraged the roundup. Whenpoliticians declare a drugwar, the police (our domesticwarriors) undoubtedly feel some pressure towageit.Butitisdoubtfulthatthedrugwarwouldhavebeenlaunchedwithsuchintensityonthegroundbutforthebribesofferedforlawenforcement’scooperation.Today thebribesmayno longerbenecessary.Now that theSWAT teams, themultiagencydrug task

forces, and the drug enforcement agenda have become a regular part of federal, state, and local lawenforcement,itappearsthedrugwarisheretostay.FundingfortheByrne-sponsoreddrugtaskforceshasdwindledinrecentyears,butPresidentObamahaspromisedtorevivetheByrnegrantprogram,claimingthatitis“criticaltocreatingtheantidrugtaskforcesourcommunitiesneed.”60Relativelylittleorganizedoppositiontothedrugwarcurrentlyexists,andanydramaticefforttoscalebackthewarmaybepubliclycondemnedas“soft”oncrime.Thewarhasbecomeinstitutionalized.Itisnolongeraspecialprogramorpoliticizedproject;itissimplythewaythingsaredone.

LegalMisrepresentation

So far,we have seen that the legal rules governing the drugwar ensure that extraordinary numbers ofpeoplewill be swept into the criminal justice system—arrestedondrug charges, often for veryminoroffenses.Butwhathappensafterarrest?Howdoesthedesignofthesystemhelptoensurethecreationofamassiveundercaste?Once arrested, one’s chances of ever being truly free of the systemof control are slim, often to the

vanishingpoint.Defendantsaretypicallydeniedmeaningfullegalrepresentation,pressuredbythethreatof a lengthy sentence into a plea bargain, and then placed under formal control—in prison or jail, onprobationorparole.MostAmericansprobablyhavenoideahowcommonitisforpeopletobeconvictedwithouteverhavingthebenefitoflegalrepresentation,orhowmanypeoplepleadguiltytocrimestheydidnotcommitbecauseoffearofmandatorysentences.Tensofthousandsofpoorpeoplegotojaileveryyearwithoutevertalkingtoalawyer,andthosewho

domeetwithalawyerforadrugoffenseoftenspendonlyafewminutesdiscussingtheircaseandoptionsbefore making a decision that will profoundly affect the rest of their lives. As one public defenderexplainedtotheLosAngelesTimes,“Theyareherdedlikecattle[intothecourtroomlockup],upat3or4inthemorning.Thentheyhavetomakedecisionsthataffecttherestoftheirlives.Youcanimaginehowstressfulitis.”61Morethanfortyyearsago,inGideonv.Wainwright,theSupremeCourtruledthatpoorpeopleaccused

of serious crimeswere entitled to counsel. Yet thousands of people are processed throughAmerica’scourtsannuallyeitherwithnolawyeratallorwithalawyerwhodoesnothavethetime,resourcesor,insomecases, the inclination toprovideeffective representation. InGideon, theSupremeCourt left it tostateandlocalgovernmentstodecidehowlegalservicesshouldbefunded.However,inthemidstofadrugwar, when politicians competewith each other to prove how “tough” they can be on crime andcriminals, funding public defender offices and paying private attorneys to represent those accused ofcrimeshasbeenalowpriority.Approximately80percentofcriminaldefendantsareindigentandthusunabletohirealawyer.62Yet

ournation’spublicdefendersystemiswoefullyinadequate.Themostvisiblesignofthefailedsystemisthe astonishingly large caseloads public defenders routinely carry, making it impossible for them toprovide meaningful representation to their clients. Sometimes defenders have well over one hundredclientsatatime;manyoftheseclientsarefacingdecadesbehindbarsorlifeimprisonment.Toooftenthequality of court-appointed counsel is poor because the miserable working conditions and low paydiscourage good attorneys from participating in the system. And some states deny representation toimpoverisheddefendantsonthetheorythatsomehowtheyshouldbeabletopayforalawyer,eventhoughthey are scarecely able to pay for food or rent. InVirginia, for example, fees paid to court-appointedattorneysforrepresentingsomeonechargedwithafelonythatcarriesasentenceoflessthantwentyyearsarecappedat$428.AndinWisconsin,morethan11,000poorpeoplegotocourtwithoutrepresentationeveryyearbecauseanyonewhoearnsmorethan$3,000peryearisconsideredabletoaffordalawyer.63InLakeCharles,Louisiana,thepublicdefenderofficehasonlytwoinvestigatorsforthe2,500newfelonycasesand4,000newmisdemeanorcasesassignedtotheofficeeachyear.64TheNAACPLegalDefenseFundandtheSouthernCenterforHumanRightsinAtlantasuedthecityofGulfport,Mississippi,allegingthatthecityoperateda“moderndaydebtor’sprison”byjailingpoorpeoplewhoareunabletopaytheirfinesanddenyingthemtherighttolawyers.In2004,theAmericanBarAssociationreleasedareportonthestatusofindigentdefense,concluding

that,“Alltoooften,defendantspleadguilty,eveniftheyareinnocent,withoutreallyunderstandingtheirlegal rights or what is occurring. Sometimes the proceedings reflect little or no recognition that the

accusedismentallyillordoesnotadequatelyunderstandEnglish.ThefundamentalrighttoalawyerthatAmericansassumeappliestoeveryoneaccusedofcriminalconducteffectivelydoesnotexistinpracticeforcountlesspeopleacrosstheUnitedStates.”65Even when people are charged with extremely serious crimes, such as murder, they may find

themselves languishingin jail foryearswithoutmeetingwithanattorney,muchlessgettinga trial.Oneextreme example is the experience of James Thomas, an impoverished day laborer in Baton Rouge,Louisiana,whowaschargedwithmurderin1996,andwaitedeightandahalfyearsforhiscasetogototrial.Itneverdid.Hismotherfinallysucceededingettinghiscasedismissed,afterscrapingtogether$500tohireanattorney,whodemonstratedtothecourtthat,inthetimeThomasspentwaitingforhiscasetogoto trial, his alibi witness had died of kidney disease. Another Louisiana man, Johnny Lee Ball, wasconvictedofsecond-degreemurderandsentencedtolifeinprisonwithoutthepossibilityofparoleaftermeetingwithapublicdefenderforjustelevenminutesbeforetrial.Ifindictedmurderershaveahardtimegetting meaningful representation, what are the odds that small-time drug dealers find themselvesrepresentedbyazealousadvocate?AsDavidCarroll,theresearchdirectorfortheNationalLegalAid&DefenderAssociationexplainedtoUSAToday,“There’sarealdisconnectinthiscountrybetweenwhatpeopleperceiveisthestateofindigentdefenseandwhatitis.IattributethattoshowslikeLaw&Order,where thedefendant says, ‘Iwanta lawyer,’andallofa suddenLegalAidappears in thecell.That’swhatpeoplethink.”66Childrencaughtupinthissystemarethemostvulnerableandyetaretheleastlikelytoberepresented

bycounsel.In1967,theU.S.SupremeCourtruledinInreGaultthatchildrenundertheageofeighteenhave the right to legal assistance with any criminal charges filed against them. In practice, however,childrenroutinely“waive”theirrighttocounselinjuvenileproceedings.Insomestates,suchasOhio,asmanyas90percentofchildrenchargedwithcriminalwrongdoingarenot representedbya lawyer.Asonepublicdefenderexplained,“Thekidscomeinwiththeirparents,whowanttogetthisdealtwithasquicklyaspossible, and they say, ‘Youdid it, admit it.’ Ifpeoplewere informedaboutwhat couldbedone,theymightactuallyaskforhelp.”67

BadDeal

Almostnooneevergoestotrial.Nearlyallcriminalcasesareresolvedthroughpleabargaining—aguiltypleabythedefendant inexchangeforsomeformofleniencybytheprosecutor.Thoughit isnotwidelyknown,theprosecutoristhemostpowerfullawenforcementofficialinthecriminaljusticesystem.Onemightthinkthatjudgesarethemostpowerful,oreventhepolice,butinrealitytheprosecutorholdsthecards. It is the prosecutor, farmore than any other criminal justice official,whoholds the keys to thejailhousedoor.Afterthepolicearrestsomeone,theprosecutorisincharge.Fewrulesconstraintheexerciseofhisor

herdiscretion.Theprosecutorisfreetodismissacaseforanyreasonornoreasonatall.Theprosecutorisalsofreetofilemorechargesagainstadefendantthancanrealisticallybeprovenincourt,solongasprobablecausearguablyexists—apracticeknownasovercharging.Thepracticeofencouragingdefendantstopleadguiltytocrimes,ratherthanaffordingthemthebenefit

ofafulltrial,hasalwayscarrieditsrisksanddownsides.Neverbeforeinourhistory,though,havesuchan extraordinary number of people felt compelled to plead guilty, even if they are innocent, simplybecause the punishment for the minor, nonviolent offense with which they have been charged is sounbelievablysevere.Whenprosecutorsoffer“only”threeyearsinprisonwhenthepenaltiesdefendantscouldreceiveiftheytooktheircasetotrialwouldbefive,ten,ortwentyyears—orlifeimprisonment—onlyextremelycourageous(orfoolish)defendentsturntheofferdown.The pressure to plead guilty to crimes has increased exponentially since the advent of theWar on

Drugs.In1986,CongresspassedTheAntiDrugAbuseAct,whichestablishedextremelylongmandatoryminimumprisontermsforlow-leveldrugdealingandpossessionofcrackcocaine.Thetypicalmandatorysentenceforafirst-timedrugoffenseinfederalcourtisfiveortenyears.Bycontrast,inotherdevelopedcountriesaroundtheworld,afirst-timedrugoffensewouldmeritnomorethansixmonthsinjail,ifjailtime is imposed at all.68 State legislatureswere eager to jumpon the “get tough” bandwagon, passingharshdruglaws,aswellas“threestrikes”lawsmandatingalifesentenceforthoseconvictedofanythirdoffense. Thesemandatoryminimum statutory schemes have transferred an enormous amount of powerfrom judges to prosecutors. Now, simply by charging someone with an offense carrying a mandatorysentenceoftentofifteenyearsorlife,prosecutorsareabletoforcepeopletopleadguiltyratherthanriskadecadeormore inprison.Prosecutorsadmit that theyroutinelychargepeoplewithcrimesforwhichtheytechnicallyhaveprobablecausebutwhichtheyseriouslydoubttheycouldeverwinincourt.69They“loadup”defendantswithcharges thatcarryextremelyharshsentences inorder to force themtopleadguiltytolesseroffensesand—here’sthekicker—toobtaintestimonyforarelatedcase.Harshsentencinglawsencouragepeopletosnitch.Thenumberof snitches indrugcaseshas soared in recentyears, partlybecause thegovernmenthas

tempted people to “cooperate”with law enforcement by offering cash, putting them “on payroll,” andpromising cuts of seized drug assets, but also because ratting out co-defendants, friends, family, oracquaintancesisoftentheonlywaytoavoidalengthymandatoryminimumsentence.70Infact,underthefederal sentencing guidelines, providing “substantial assistance” is often the only way defendants canhope to obtain a sentence below the mandatory minimum. The “assistance” provided by snitches isnotoriously unreliable, as studies have documented countless informants who have fabricated storiesaboutdrug-relatedandothercriminalactivityinexchangeformoneyorleniencyintheirpendingcriminalcases.71Whilesuchconductisdeplorable,itisnotdifficulttounderstand.Whoamonguswouldnotbetemptedtolieifitwastheonlywaytoavoidaforty-yearsentenceforaminordrugcrime?Thepressuretoplea-bargainandthereby“convictyourself”inexchangeforsomekindofleniencyis

notanaccidentalby-productofthemandatory-sentencingregime.TheU.S.SentencingCommissionitself

hasnotedthat“thevalueofamandatoryminimumsentenceliesnotinitsimposition,butinitsvalueasabargaining chip to be given away in return for the resource-saving plea from the defendant to amoreleniently sanctioned charge.” Describing severe mandatory sentences as a bargaining chip is a majorunderstatement,givenitspotentialforextractingguiltypleasfrompeoplewhoareinnocentofanycrime.Itisimpossibletoknowforcertainhowmanyinnocentdrugdefendantsconvictthemselveseveryyear

byacceptingapleabargainoutoffearofmandatorysentences,orhowmanyareconvictedduetolyinginformantsandpaidwitnesses,butreliableestimatesofthenumberofinnocentpeoplecurrentlyinprisontend to range from2 percent to 5 percent.72While those numbersmay sound small (and probably areunderestimates),theytranslateintothousandsofinnocentpeoplewhoarelockedup,someofwhomwilldie in prison. In fact, if only 1 percent ofAmerica’s prisoners are actually innocent of the crimes forwhich they have been convicted, that would mean tens of thousands of innocent people are currentlylanguishingbehindbarsintheUnitedStates.The real point here, however, is not that innocent people are locked up. That has been true since

penitentiariesfirstopened inAmerica.Thecriticalpoint is that thousandsofpeopleareswept into thecriminal justice system every year pursuant to the drug war without much regard for their guilt orinnocence.Thepoliceareallowedbythecourtstoconductfishingexpeditionsfordrugsonstreetsandfreewaysbasedonnothingmorethanahunch.Homesmaybesearchedfordrugsbasedonatipfromanunreliable,confidentialinformantwhoistradingtheinformationformoneyortoescapeprisontime.Andonce swept inside the system, people are often denied attorneys or meaningful representation andpressured into plea bargains by the threat of unbelievably harsh sentences—sentences for minor drugcrimesthatarehigherthanmanycountriesimposeonconvictedmurderers.Thisisthewaytheroundupworks,anditworksthiswayinvirtuallyeverymajorcityintheUnitedStates.

TimeServed

Onceconvictedoffelonydrugcharges,one’schancesofbeingreleasedfromthesysteminshortorderareslim,atbest.Theeliminationofjudicialdiscretionthroughmandatorysentencinglawshasforcedjudgesto impose sentences for drug crimes that are often longer than those violent criminals receive.Whenjudgeshavediscretion, theymayconsideradefendant’sbackgroundand imposea lighterpenalty if thedefendant’spersonalcircumstances—extremepovertyorexperienceofabuse, forexample—warrant it.This flexibility—which is important in all criminal cases—is especially important in drug cases, asstudieshaveindicatedthatmanydrugdefendantsareusingorsellingtosupportanaddiction.73Referringadefendanttotreatment,ratherthansendinghimorhertoprison,maywellbethemostprudentchoice—savinggovernmentresourcesandpotentiallysavingthedefendantfromalifetimeofaddiction.Likewise,imposing a short prison sentence (or none at all) may increase the chances that the defendant willexperiencesuccessfulreentry.Alengthyprisontermmayincreasetheoddsthatreentrywillbeextremelydifficult, leading torelapse,andre-imprisonment.Mandatorydrugsentencing lawsstrip judgesof theirtraditionalroleofconsideringallrelevantcircumstancesinanefforttodojusticeintheindividualcase.Nevertheless,harshmandatoryminimumsentencesfordrugoffendershavebeenconsistentlyupheldby

theU.S.SupremeCourt.In1982,theSupremeCourtupheldfortyyearsofimprisonmentforpossessionandanattempttosell9ouncesofmarijuana.74Severalyearslater,inHarmelinv.Michigan, theCourtupheldasentenceoflifeimprisonmentforadefendantwithnopriorconvictionswhoattemptedtosell672grams(approximately23ounces)ofcrackcocaine.75TheCourtfoundthesentencesimposedinthosecases“reasonablyproportionate”totheoffensescommitted—andnot“cruelandunusual”inviolationoftheEighthAmendment.Thisrulingwasremarkablegiventhat,priortotheDrugReformActof1986,thelongestsentenceCongresshadeverimposedforpossessionofanydruginanyamountwasoneyear.Alifesentenceforafirst-timedrugoffenseisunheardofintherestofthedevelopedworld.Evenforhigh-end drug crimes,most countries impose sentences that aremeasured inmonths, rather than years. Forexample, a conviction for selling a kilogram of heroin yields a mandatory ten-year sentence in U.S.federalcourt,comparedwithsixmonthsinprisoninEngland.76Remarkably,intheUnitedStates,alifesentenceisdeemedperfectlyappropriateforafirst-timedrugoffender.The most famous Supreme Court decision upholding mandatory minimum sentences is Lockyer v.

Andrade.77 In that case, the Court rejected constitutional challenges to sentences of twenty-five yearswithoutparoleforamanwhostolethreegolfclubsfromaproshop,andfiftyyearswithoutparoleforanother man for stealing children’s videotapes from a Kmart store. These sentences were imposedpursuanttoCalifornia’scontroversialthreestrikeslaw,whichmandatesasentenceoftwenty-fiveyearstolife for recidivists convicted of a third felony, nomatter howminor.Writing for theCourt’smajority,JusticeSandraDayO’Connoracknowledgedthatthesentenceswereseverebutconcludedthattheyarenotgrosslydisproportionatetotheoffense,andthereforedonotviolatetheEighthAmendment’sbanon“cruelandunusual”punishments.Indissent,JusticeDavidH.Souterretorted,“IfAndrade’ssentence[forstealingvideotapes]isnotgrosslydisproportionate,theprinciplehasnomeaning.”Similarly,counselforoneofthedefendants,UniversityofSouthernCalifornialawprofessorErwinChemerinsky,notedthattheCourt’s reasoningmakes it extremely difficult if not impossible to challenge any recidivist sentencinglaw:“Ifthesesentencesaren’tcruelandunusualpunishment,whatwouldbe?”78Mandatory sentencing laws are frequently justified as necessary to keep “violent criminals” off the

streets, yet these penalties are imposedmost often against drug offenders and thosewho are guilty ofnonviolentcrimes.Infact,underthree-strikesregimes,suchastheoneinCalifornia,a“repeatoffender”could be someonewho had a single prior case decades ago. First and second strikes are counted by

individualcharges,ratherthanindividualcases,soasinglecasecanresultinfirst,second,andeventhirdstrikes.Forexample,apersonarrestedforpossessionofasubstantialamountofmarijuana,aswellasatinyamountofcocaine,couldbechargedwithatleasttwoseparatefelonies:possessionwithintenttosellmarijuana,aswellaspossessionofcocaine.Pleadingguiltytoeachofthesecrimeswouldresultin“twostrikes.”Fifteenyearslater,iftheindividualisarrestedforpassingabadcheck,heorshecouldbefacingathirdstrikeandalifesentence.Tomakemattersworse,sentencesforeachchargecanrunconsecutively,soadefendantcaneasilyfaceasentenceoffifty,seventy-five,oronehundredyearstolifearisingfromasinglecase.Infact,fiftyyearstolifewastheactualsentencegiventoLeandroAndrade,whosesentenceforstealingvideotapeswasupheldbytheSupremeCourt.Theclearmajorityof those subject toharshmandatoryminimumsentences in the federal systemare

drug offenders.Most are low-level,minor drug dealers—not “drug kingpins.” The stories are legion.MarcusBoydwasarrestedafterselling3.9gramsofcrackcocainetoaconfidentialinformantworkingwitharegionaldrugtaskforce.Atthetimeofhisarrest,Marcuswastwenty-fouryearsoldandhadbeenaddicted todrugsforsixyears,beginningshortlyafterhismother’sdeathandescalating throughouthisearlytwenties.Hemettheinformantthroughaclosefamilyfriend,someonehetrusted.Atsentencing,thejudgebasedthedrugquantitycalculationontestimonyfromtheinformantandanotherwitness,whobothclaimedtheyboughtcrackfromMarcusonotheroccasions.Asaresult,Marcuswasheldaccountablefor37.4grams (theequivalentof1.3ounces)basedon thestatementsmadeby the informantand theotherwitness.Hewassentencedtomore thanfourteenyears inprison.His twochildrenweresixandsevenyearsoldatthetimeofhissentencing.Theywillbeadultswhenheisreleased.79WeldonAngelos is anothercasualtyof thedrugwar.Hewill spend the restofhis life inprison for

threemarijuanasales.Angelos,atwenty-four-year-oldrecordproducer,possessedaweapon—whichhedidnotuseorthreatentouse—atthetimeofthesales.Underfederalsentencingguidelines,however,thesentencingjudgewasobligatedtoimposeafifty-five-yearmandatoryminimumsentence.Upondoingso,thejudgenotedhisreluctancetosendtheyoungmanawayforlifeforthreemarijuanasales.Hesaidfromthebench, “TheCourtbelieves that to sentenceMr.Angelos toprison for the restofhis life isunjust,cruel,andevenirrational.”80Some federal judges, including conservative judges, have quit in protest of federal drug laws and

sentencingguidelines.Face-to-facewiththosewhoseliveshanginthebalance,theyarefarclosertothehuman tragedy occasioned by the drug war than the legislators who write the laws from afar. JudgeLawrence Irving, aReagan appointee, noted upon his retirement: “If I remain on the bench, I have nochoicebuttofollowthelaw.Ijustcan’t,ingoodconscience,continuetodothis.”81Otherjudges,suchasJudgeJackWeinstein,publicly refused to takeanymoredrugcases,describing“a senseofdepressionaboutmuchofthecrueltyIhavebeenapartytoinconnectionwiththe‘warondrugs.’”82AnotherReaganappointee,JudgeStanleyMarshall,toldareporter,“I’vealwaysbeenconsideredafairlyharshsentencer,but it’skillingmethatI’msendingsomanylow-leveloffendersawayforall this time.”83Hemade thestatement after imposing a five-year sentence on amother inWashington,D.C.,whowas convicted of“possession”ofcrackfoundbypoliceinalockedboxthathersonhadhiddeninherattic.InCalifornia,reportersdescribedasimilarevent:

U.S. District Judge William W. Schwarzer, a Republican appointee, is not known as a lightsentencer.ThusitwasthateveryoneinhisSanFranciscocourtroomwatchedinstunnedsilenceasSchwarzer, known for his stoic demeanor, choked with tears as he anguished over sentencingRichardAnderson,afirstoffenderOaklandlongshoreman,totenyearsinprisonwithoutparoleforwhat appeared to be a minormistake in judgment in having given a ride to a drug dealer for ameetingwithanundercoveragent.84

EvenSupremeCourtJusticeAnthonyKennedyhascondemnedtheharshmandatoryminimumsentencesimposedondrugoffenders.HetoldattorneysgatheredfortheAmericanBarAssociation’s2003annualconference:“Our[prison]resourcesaremisspent,ourpunishmentstoosevere,oursentencestooloaded.”He then added, “I can accept neither the necessity nor the wisdom of federal mandatory minimumsentences.Inalltoomanycases,mandatoryminimumsentencesareunjust.”85

ThePrisonLabel

Mostpeople imagine that theexplosion in theU.S.prisonpopulationduring thepast twenty-fiveyearsreflects changes in crime rates. Fewwould guess that our prison population leapt from approximately350,000to2.3millioninsuchashortperiodoftimeduetochangesinlawsandpolicies,notchangesincrime rates.Yet it has been changes in our laws—particularly the dramatic increases in the length ofprisonsentences—thathavebeenresponsibleforthegrowthofourprisonsystem,notincreasesincrime.Onestudysuggeststhattheentireincreaseintheprisonpopulationfrom1980to2001canbeexplainedbysentencingpolicychanges.86Becauseharshsentencing is theprimarycauseof theprisonexplosion,onemight reasonablyassume

thatsubstantiallyreducingthelengthofprisonsentenceswouldeffectivelydismantlethisnewsystemofcontrol.Thatview,however,ismistaken.Thissystemdependsontheprisonlabel,notprisontime.Onceapersonislabeledafelon,heorsheisusheredintoaparalleluniverseinwhichdiscrimination,

stigma,andexclusionareperfectlylegal,andprivilegesofcitizenshipsuchasvotingandjuryserviceareoff-limits.Itdoesnotmatterwhetheryouhaveactuallyspenttimeinprison;yoursecond-classcitizenshipbegins themoment you are branded a felon.Most people branded felons, in fact, are not sentenced toprison.Asof2008,therewereapproximately2.3millionpeopleinprisonsandjails,andastaggering5.1million people under “community correctional supervision”—i.e., on probation or parole.87 Merelyreducingprisontermsdoesnothaveamajorimpactonthemajorityofpeopleinthesystem.Itisthebadgeofinferiority—thefelonyrecord—thatrelegatespeoplefortheirentirelives, tosecond-classstatus.Asdescribedinchapter4,fordrugfelons,thereislittlehopeofescape.Barredfrompublichousingbylaw,discriminated against by private landlords, ineligible for food stamps, forced to “check the box”indicatingafelonyconvictiononemploymentapplicationsfornearlyeveryjob,anddeniedlicensesforawiderangeofprofessions,peoplewhoseonlycrimeisdrugaddictionorpossessionofasmallamountofdrugs for recreational use find themselves locked out of the mainstream society and economy—permanently.No wonder, then, that most people labeled felons find their way back into prison. According to a

BureauofJusticeStatisticsstudy,about30percentof releasedprisoners in itssamplewererearrestedwithinsixmonthsofrelease.88Withinthreeyears,nearly68percentwererearrestedatleastonceforanewoffense.89Onlyasmallminorityarerearrestedforviolentcrimes;thevastmajorityarerearrestedforpropertyoffenses,drugoffenses,andoffensesagainstthepublicorder.90For those releasedonprobationorparole, the risksareespeciallyhigh.Theyare subject to regular

surveillance and monitoring by the police and may be stopped and searched (with or without theirconsent)foranyreasonornoreasonatall.Asaresult,theyarefarmorelikelytobearrested(again)thanthosewhosebehaviorisnotsubjecttoconstantscrutinybylawenforcement.Probationersandparoleesareat increasedriskofarrestbecause their livesaregovernedbyadditional rules thatdonotapply toeveryoneelse.Myriadrestrictionsontheirtravelandbehavior(suchasaprohibitiononassociatingwithotherfelons),aswellasvariousrequirementsofprobationandparole(suchaspayingfinesandmeetingwithprobationofficers),createopportunitiesforarrest.Violationofthesespecialrulescanlandsomeonerightbackinprison.Infact,thatiswhathappensagooddealofthetime.Theextraordinaryincreaseinprisonadmissionsduetoparoleandprobationviolationsisduealmost

entirely to theWaronDrugs.With respect toparole, in1980,only1percentof all prisonadmissionswereparoleviolators.Twentyyearslater,morethanonethird(35percent)ofprisonadmissionsresultedfromparoleviolations.91Toputthemattermorestarkly:Aboutasmanypeoplewerereturnedtoprisonfor parole violations in 2000 as were admitted to prison in 1980 for all reasons.92 Of all parole

violatorsreturnedtoprisonin2000,onlyone-thirdwerereturnedforanewconviction;two-thirdswerereturnedforatechnicalviolationsuchasmissingappointmentswithaparoleofficer,failingtomaintainemployment,orfailingadrugtest.93Inthissystemofcontrol,failingtocopewellwithone’sexilestatusistreatedlikeacrime.Ifyoufail,afterbeingreleasedfromprisonwithacriminalrecord—yourpersonalbadgeof inferiority—to remaindrug free,or ifyou fail toget a jobagainst all theodds,or ifyougetdepressedandmissanappointmentwithyourparoleofficer(orifyoucannotaffordthebusfaretotakeyouthere),youcanbesentrightbacktoprison—wheresocietyapparentlythinksmillionsofAmericansbelong.This disturbing phenomenon of people cycling in and out of prison, trapped by their second-class

status,hasbeendescribedbyLoïcWacquantasa“closedcircuitofperpetualmarginality.”94Hundredsofthousands of people are released from prison every year, only to find themselves locked out of themainstreamsocietyandeconomy.Mostultimatelyreturntoprison,sometimesfortherestoftheirlives.Othersarereleasedagain,only tofindthemselves inprecisely thecircumstances theyoccupiedbefore,unabletocopewiththestigmaoftheprisonlabelandtheirpermanentpariahstatus.Reducingtheamountoftimepeoplespendbehindbars—byeliminatingharshmandatoryminimums—

willalleviatesomeoftheunnecessarysufferingcausedbythissystem,butitwillnotdisturbtheclosedcircuit.Thoselabeledfelonswillcontinuetocycleinandoutofprison,subjecttoperpetualsurveillanceby the police, and unable to integrate into themainstream society and economy.Unless the number ofpeoplewhoare labeled felons isdramatically reduced,andunless the lawsandpolicies thatkeepex-offendersmarginalizedfromthemainstreamsocietyandeconomyareeliminated,thesystemwillcontinuetocreateandmaintainanenormousundercaste.

3

TheColorofJustice

ImagineyouareEmmaFayeStewart,athirty-year-old,singleAfricanAmericanmotheroftwowhowasarrested as part of a drug sweep inHearne, Texas.1 All but one of the people arrestedwereAfricanAmerican.Youareinnocent.Afteraweekinjail,youhavenoonetocareforyourtwosmallchildrenandare eager to get home. Your court-appointed attorney urges you to plead guilty to a drug distributioncharge,sayingtheprosecutorhasofferedprobation.Yourefuse,steadfastlyproclaimingyourinnocence.Finally,afteralmostamonthinjail,youdecidetopleadguiltysoyoucanreturnhometoyourchildren.Unwillingtoriskatrialandyearsofimprisonment,youaresentencedtotenyearsprobationandorderedtopay$1,000infines,aswellascourtandprobationcosts.Youarealsonowbrandedadrugfelon.Youarenolongereligibleforfoodstamps;youmaybediscriminatedagainstinemployment;youcannotvotefor at least twelve years; and you are about to be evicted from public housing. Once homeless, yourchildrenwillbetakenfromyouandputinfostercare.A judge eventually dismisses all cases against thedefendantswhodidnot pleadguilty.At trial, the

judge finds that the entire sweep was based on the testimony of a single informant who lied to theprosecution. You, however, are still a drug felon, homeless, and desperate to regain custody of yourchildren.NowplaceyourselfintheshoesofCliffordRunoalds,anotherAfricanAmericanvictimoftheHearne

drugbust.2YoureturnedhometoBryan,Texas,toattendthefuneralofyoureighteen-month-olddaughter.Beforethefuneralservicesbegin, thepoliceshowupandhandcuffyou.Youbegtheofficers toletyoutakeonelastlookatyourdaughterbeforesheisburied.Thepolicerefuse.Youaretoldbyprosecutorsthatyouareneededtotestifyagainstoneofthedefendantsinarecentdrugbust.Youdenywitnessinganydrugtransaction;youdon’tknowwhattheyaretalkingabout.Becauseofyourrefusaltocooperate,youareindictedonfelonycharges.Afteramonthofbeingheldinjail,thechargesagainstyouaredropped.Youaretechnicallyfree,butasaresultofyourarrestandperiodofincarceration,youloseyourjob,yourapartment,yourfurniture,andyourcar.Nottomentionthechancetosaygood-byetoyourbabygirl.This is theWaronDrugs.Thebrutal storiesdescribedabovearenot isolated incidents,nor are the

racialidentitiesofEmmaFayeStewartandCliffordRunoaldsrandomoraccidental.Ineverystateacrossournation,AfricanAmericans—particularlyinthepoorestneighborhoods—aresubjectedtotacticsandpractices that would result in public outrage and scandal if committed in middle-class whiteneighborhoods.Inthedrugwar,theenemyisraciallydefined.Thelawenforcementmethodsdescribedinchapter2havebeenemployedalmostexclusivelyinpoorcommunitiesofcolor,resultinginjaw-droppingnumbersofAfricanAmericansandLatinosfillingournation’sprisonsandjailseveryyear.Wearetoldbydrugwarriorsthattheenemyinthiswarisathing—drugs—notagroupofpeople,butthefactsproveotherwise.Human RightsWatch reported in 2000 that, in seven states, African Americans constitute 80 to 90

percentofalldrugoffenderssenttoprison.3Inatleastfifteenstates,blacksareadmittedtoprisonondrugchargesataratefromtwentytofifty-seventimesgreaterthanthatofwhitemen.4Infact,nationwide,therateof incarceration forAfricanAmericandrugoffendersdwarfs the rateofwhites.When theWaronDrugsgainedfullsteaminthemid-1980s,prisonadmissionsforAfricanAmericansskyrocketed,nearlyquadruplinginthreeyears,andthenincreasingsteadilyuntilitreachedin2000alevelmorethantwenty-

sixtimesthelevelin1983.5Thenumberof2000drugadmissionsforLatinoswastwenty-twotimesthenumberof1983admissions.6Whiteshavebeenadmittedtoprisonfordrugoffensesatincreasedratesaswell—thenumberofwhitesadmittedfordrugoffensesin2000waseight timesthenumberadmittedin1983—buttheirrelativenumbersaresmallcomparedtoblacks’andLatinos’.7Althoughthemajorityofillegal drug users and dealers nationwide are white, three-fourths of all people imprisoned for drugoffenseshavebeenblackorLatino.8Inrecentyears,ratesofblackimprisonmentfordrugoffenseshavedipped somewhat—declining approximately 25 percent from their zenith in the mid-1990s—but itremainsthecasethatAfricanAmericansareincarceratedatgrosslydisproportionateratesthroughouttheUnitedStates.9Thereis,ofcourse,anofficialexplanationforallofthis:crimerates.Thisexplanationhastremendous

appeal—beforeyouknowthefacts—foritisconsistentwith,andreinforces,dominantracialnarrativesaboutcrimeandcriminalitydatingbacktoslavery.Thetruth,however,isthatratesandpatternsofdrugcrimedonotexplaintheglaringracialdisparitiesinourcriminaljusticesystem.Peopleofallracesuseandsellillegaldrugsatremarkablysimilarrates.10Iftherearesignificantdifferencesinthesurveystobefound, theyfrequentlysuggest thatwhites,particularlywhiteyouth,aremore likely toengage in illegaldrugdealingthanpeopleofcolor.11Onestudy,forexample,publishedin2000bytheNationalInstituteonDrugAbusereportedthatwhitestudentsusecocaineatseventimestherateofblackstudents,usecrackcocaineateighttimestherateofblackstudents,anduseheroinatseventimestherateofblackstudents.12Thatsamesurveyrevealedthatnearlyidenticalpercentagesofwhiteandblackhighschoolseniorsusemarijuana.TheNationalHouseholdSurveyonDrugAbusereportedin2000thatwhiteyouthaged12-17aremorethanathirdmorelikelytohavesoldillegaldrugsthanAfricanAmericanyouth.13Thustheverysame year Human Rights Watch was reporting that African Americans were being arrested andimprisonedatunprecedentedrates,governmentdatarevealedthatblackswerenomorelikelytobeguiltyofdrugcrimesthanwhitesandthatwhiteyouthwereactuallythemostlikelyofanyracialorethnicgrouptobeguiltyofillegaldrugpossessionandsales.Anynotionthatdruguseamongblacksismoresevereordangerousisbeliedbythedata;whiteyouthhaveaboutthreetimesthenumberofdrug-relatedemergencyroomvisitsastheirAfricanAmericancounterparts.14Thenotionthatwhitescomprise thevastmajorityofdrugusersanddealers—andmaywellbemore

likelythanotherracialgroupstocommitdrugcrimes—mayseemimplausibletosome,giventhemediaimagerywearefedonadailybasisandtheracialcompositionofourprisonsandjails.Uponreflection,however, theprevalenceofwhitedrugcrime—includingdrugdealing—shouldnotbe surprising.Afterall, where do whites get their illegal drugs? Do they all drive to the ghetto to purchase them fromsomebodystandingonastreetcorner?No.Studiesconsistentlyindicatethatdrugmarkets,likeAmericansocietygenerally,reflectournation’sracialandsocioeconomicboundaries.Whitestendtoselltowhites;blackstoblacks.15Universitystudentstendtoselltoeachother.16Ruralwhites,fortheirpart,don’tmakeaspecialtriptothe’hoodtopurchasemarijuana.Theybuyitfromsomebodydowntheroad.17Whitehighschool students typically buy drugs from white classmates, friends, or older relatives. Even BarryMcCaffrey,formerdirectoroftheWhiteHouseOfficeofNationalDrugControlPolicy,onceremarked,ifyourchildboughtdrugs,“itwasfromastudentoftheirownracegenerally.”18Thenotionthatmostillegaldrug use and sales happens in the ghetto is pure fiction. Drug trafficking occurs there, but it occurseverywhereelseinAmericaaswell.Nevertheless,blackmenhavebeenadmittedtostateprisonondrugchargesataratethatismorethanthirteentimeshigherthanwhitemen.19Theracialbiasinherentinthedrugwarisamajorreasonthat1inevery14blackmenwasbehindbarsin2006,comparedwith1in106whitemen.20Foryoungblackmen,thestatisticsareevenworse.Onein9blackmenbetweentheagesoftwentyandthirty-fivewasbehindbarsin2006,andfarmorewereundersomeformofpenalcontrol—

such as probation or parole.21 These gross racial disparities simply cannot be explained by rates ofillegaldrugactivityamongAfricanAmericans.What, then, does explain the extraordinary racial disparities in our criminal justice system? Old-

fashioned racism seems out of the question. Politicians and law enforcement officials today rarelyendorseraciallybiasedpractices,andmostofthemfiercelycondemnracialdiscriminationofanykind.Whenaccusedofracialbias,policeandprosecutors—likemostAmericans—expresshorrorandoutrage.Formsofracediscriminationthatwereopenandnotoriousforcenturiesweretransformedinthe1960sand1970s intosomethingun-American—anaffront toournewlyconceivedethicofcolorblindness.Bytheearly1980s,surveydataindicatedthat90percentofwhitesthoughtblackandwhitechildrenshouldattendthesameschools,71percentdisagreedwiththeideathatwhiteshavearighttokeepblacksoutoftheir neighborhoods, 80 percent indicated theywould support a black candidate for president, and 66percent opposed laws prohibiting intermarriage. 22 Although far fewer supported specific policiesdesignedtoachieveracialequalityorintegration(suchasbusing),themerefactthatlargemajoritiesofwhiteswere,bytheearly1980s,supportingtheantidiscriminationprinciplereflectedaprofoundshiftinracialattitudes.Themarginofsupportforcolorblindnormshasonlyincreasedsincethen.This dramatically changed racial climate has led defenders of mass incarceration to insist that our

criminaljusticesystem,whateveritspastsins,isnowlargelyfairandnondiscriminatory.Theypointtoviolent crime rates in theAfricanAmerican community as a justification for the staggering number ofblackmenwhofindthemselvesbehindbars.Blackmen,theysay,havemuchhigherratesofviolentcrime;that’swhysomanyofthemarelockedinprisons.Typically,thisiswherethediscussionends.Theproblemwiththisabbreviatedanalysisisthatviolentcrimeisnotresponsiblefortheprisonboom.

Asnumerousresearchershaveshown,violentcrimerateshavefluctuatedover theyearsandbear littlerelationship to incarceration rates—which have soared during the past three decades regardless ofwhetherviolentcrimewasgoingupordown.23Todayviolentcrimeratesareathistoricallylowlevels,yetincarcerationratescontinuetoclimb.Murderconvictionstendtoreceiveatremendousamountofmediaattention,whichfeedsthepublic’s

sensethatviolentcrimeisrampantandforeverontherise.Butlikeviolentcrimeingeneral,themurderratecannotexplaintheprisonboom.Homicideconvictionsaccountforatinyfractionofthegrowthintheprisonpopulation.Inthefederalsystem,forexample,homicideoffendersaccountfor0.4percentofthepastdecade’sgrowthinthefederalprisonpopulation,whiledrugoffendersaccountfornearly61percentof that expansion.24 In the state system, less than 3 percent of new court commitments to state prisontypically involve people convicted of homicide. 25 As much as a third of state prisoners are violentoffenders, but that statistic can easily be misinterpreted. Violent offenders tend to get longer prisonsentencesthannonviolentoffenders,andthereforecompriseamuchlargershareoftheprisonpopulationthantheywouldif theyhadearlierreleasedates.Theuncomfortablereality is thatconvictionsfordrugoffenses—notviolentcrime—arethesinglemostimportantcauseoftheprisonboomintheUnitedStates,andpeopleofcolorareconvictedofdrugoffensesatratesoutofallproportiontotheirdrugcrimes.These facts may still leave some readers unsatisfied. The idea that the criminal justice system

discriminatesinsuchaterrificfashionwhenfewpeopleopenlyexpressorendorseracialdiscriminationmayseemfar-fetched,ifnotabsurd.HowcouldtheWaronDrugsoperateinadiscriminatorymanner,onsuch a large scale, when hardly anyone advocates or engages in explicit race discrimination? Thatquestion is the subject of this chapter.Aswe shall see, despite the colorblind rhetoric and fanfare ofrecentyears,thedesignofthedrugwareffectivelyguaranteesthatthosewhoaresweptintothenation’snewundercastearelargelyblackandbrown.This sort of claim invites skepticism. Nonracial explanations and excuses for the systematic mass

incarceration of people of color are plentiful. It is the genius of the new systemof control that it canalwaysbedefendedonnonracialgrounds,giventherarityofanooseoraracialslurinconnectionwithanyparticular criminal case.Moreover, becauseblacks andwhites are almostnever similarly situated(givenextremeracialsegregationinhousinganddisparatelifeexperiences),tryingto“controlforrace”in an effort to evaluate whether the mass incarceration of people of color is really about race orsomethingelse—anythingelse—isdifficult.Butitisnotimpossible.Abitofcommonsenseisoverdueinpublicdiscussionsaboutracialbiasinthecriminaljusticesystem.

Thegreatdebateoverwhetherblackmenhavebeen targetedby thecriminal justicesystemorunfairlytreatedintheWaronDrugsoftenoverlookstheobvious.Whatispainfullyobviouswhenonestepsbackfromindividualcasesandspecificpoliciesisthatthesystemofmassincarcerationoperateswithstunningefficiency to sweep people of color off the streets, lock them in cages, and then release them into aninferiorsecond-classstatus.NowhereisthismoretruethanintheWaronDrugs.Thecentralquestion,then,ishowexactlydoesaformallycolorblindcriminaljusticesystemachieve

suchraciallydiscriminatoryresults?Rathereasily,itturnsout.Theprocessoccursintwostages.Thefirststepistograntlawenforcementofficialsextraordinarydiscretionregardingwhomtostop,search,arrest,andchargefordrugoffenses,thusensuringthatconsciousandunconsciousracialbeliefsandstereotypeswill be given free reign. Unbridled discretion inevitably creates huge racial disparities. Then, thedamning step: Close the courthouse doors to all claims by defendants and private litigants that thecriminal justice system operates in racially discriminatory fashion.Demand that anyonewhowants tochallengeracialbiasinthesystemoffer,inadvance,clearproofthattheracialdisparitiesaretheproductof intentional racial discrimination—i.e., the work of a bigot. This evidence will almost never beavailableintheeraofcolorblindness,becauseeveryoneknows—butdoesnotsay—thattheenemyintheWar on Drugs can be identified by race. This simple design has helped to produce one of the mostextraordinarysystemsofracializedsocialcontroltheworldhaseverseen.

PickingandChoosing—TheRoleofDiscretion

Chapter2describedthefirststepinsomedetail,includingthelegalrulesthatgrantpolicethediscretionand authority to stop, interrogate, and search anyone, anywhere, provided they get “consent” from thetargeted individual. It also examined the legal framework that affords prosecutors extraordinarydiscretiontochargeornotcharge,pleabargainornot,andloadupdefendantswithchargescarryingthethreatofharshmandatorysentences,inordertoforceguiltypleas,evenincasesinwhichthedefendantsmay well be innocent. These rules have made it possible for law enforcement agencies to boostdramaticallytheirratesofdrugarrestsandconvictions,evenincommunitieswheredrugcrimeisstableordeclining.26Butthatisnotall.Theseruleshavealsoguaranteedraciallydiscriminatoryresults.The reason is this: Drug-law enforcement is unlike most other types of law enforcement. When a

violentcrimeorarobberyoratrespassoccurs,someoneusuallycallsthepolice.Thereisaclearvictimandperpetrator.Someoneishurtorharmedinsomewayandwantstheoffenderpunished.Butwithdrugcrime,neitherthepurchaserofthedrugsnorthesellerhasanyincentivetocontactlawenforcement.Itisconsensualactivity.Equally important, it ispopular.TheclearmajorityofAmericansofall raceshaveviolateddruglawsintheirlifetime.Infact,inanygivenyear,morethanoneintenAmericansviolatedruglaws.Butduetoresourceconstraints(andthepoliticsofthedrugwar),onlyasmallfractionarearrested,convicted,andincarcerated.In2002,forexample,therewere19.5millionillicitdrugusers,comparedto1.5milliondrugarrestsand175,000peopleadmittedtoprisonforadrugoffense.27Theubiquityofillegaldrugactivity,combinedwithitsconsensualnature,requiresafarmoreproactive

approachbylawenforcementthanwhatisrequiredtoaddressordinarystreetcrime.Itisimpossibleforlawenforcementtoidentifyandarresteverydrugcriminal.Strategicchoicesmustbemadeaboutwhomtotargetandwhattacticstoemploy.PoliceandprosecutorsdidnotdeclaretheWaronDrugs—andsomeinitiallyopposedit—butoncethefinancialincentivesforwagingthewarbecametooattractivetoignore,lawenforcement agencies had to ask themselves, ifwe’re going towage thiswar,where should it befoughtandwhoshouldbetakenprisoner?That question was not difficult to answer, given the political and social context. As discussed in

chapter 1, the Reagan administration launched amedia campaign a few years after the drugwarwasannouncedinanefforttopublicizehorrorstoriesinvolvingblackcrackusersandcrackdealersinghettocommunities.AlthoughcrackcocainehadnotyethitthestreetswhentheWaronDrugswasdeclaredin1982, itsappearancea fewyears latercreated theperfectopportunity for theReaganadministration tobuildsupportfor itsnewwar.Druguse,onceconsideredaprivate,public-healthmatter,wasreframedthroughpoliticalrhetoricandmediaimageryasagravethreattothenationalorder.Jimmie Reeves and Richard Campbell show in their research how the media imagery surrounding

cocainechangedasthepracticeofsmokingcocainecametobeassociatedwithpoorblacks.28Early inthe1980s,thetypicalcocaine-relatedstoryfocusedonwhiterecreationaluserswhosnortedthedruginits powder form. These stories generally relied on news sources associated with the drug treatmentindustry,suchasrehabilitationclinics,andemphasizedthepossibilityofrecovery.By1985,however,astheWaronDrugsmovedintohighgear,thisframewassupplantedbyanew“siegeparadigm,”inwhichtransgressors were poor, nonwhite users and dealers of crack cocaine. Law enforcement officialsassumedtheroleofdrug“experts,”emphasizingtheneedforlawandorderresponses—acrackdownonthose associatedwith the drug. These findings are consistentwith numerous other studies, including astudyofnetworktelevisionnewsfrom1990and1991,whichfoundthatapredictable“usagainstthem”framewasused in thenewsstories,with“us”beingwhite,suburbanAmerica,and“them”beingblackAmericansandafewcorruptedwhites.29Themediabonanzainspiredbytheadministration’scampaignsolidifiedinthepublicimaginationthe

imageoftheblackdrugcriminal.Althoughexplicitlyracialpoliticalappealsremainedrare,thecallsfor“war”atatimewhenthemediawassaturatedwithimagesofblackdrugcrimeleftlittledoubtaboutwhotheenemywasintheWaronDrugsandexactlywhathelookedlike.JeromeMiller,theformerexecutivedirectoroftheNationalCenterforInstitutionsandAlternatives,describedthedynamicthisway:“Therearecertaincodewordsthatallowyounevertohavetosay‘race,’buteverybodyknowsthat’swhatyoumeanand‘crime’isoneofthose....Sowhenwetalkaboutlockingupmoreandmorepeople,whatwe’rereally talking about is locking up more and more black men.”30 Another commentator noted, “It isunnecessary to speak directly of race [today] because speaking about crime is talking about race.”31Indeed,not longafter thedrugwarwasrampedupin themediaandpoliticaldiscourse,almostnooneimaginedthatdrugcriminalscouldbeanythingotherthanblack.A surveywas conducted in 1995 asking the following question: “Would you close your eyes for a

second,envisionadruguser,anddescribethatpersontome?”ThestartlingresultswerepublishedintheJournalofAlcoholandDrugEducation.Ninety-fivepercentofrespondentspicturedablackdruguser,whileonly5percentimaginedotherracialgroups.32TheseresultscontrastsharplywiththerealityofdrugcrimeinAmerica.AfricanAmericansconstitutedonly15percentofcurrentdrugusersin1995,andtheyconstituteroughlythesamepercentagetoday.Whitesconstitutedthevastmajorityofdrugusersthen(andnow),butalmostnoonepicturedawhitepersonwhenaskedtoimaginewhatadruguserlookslike.Thesamegroupofrespondentsalsoperceivedthetypicaldrugtraffickerasblack.Thereisnoreasontobelievethatthesurveyresultswouldhavebeenanydifferentifpoliceofficersor

prosecutors—rather than the general public—had been the respondents. Law enforcement officials, nolessthantherestofus,havebeenexposedtotheraciallychargedpoliticalrhetoricandmediaimageryassociatedwiththedrugwar.Infact,fornearlythreedecades,newsstoriesregardingvirtuallyallstreetcrimehavedisproportionatelyfeaturedAfricanAmericanoffenders.Onestudysuggeststhatthestandardcrimenews“script”issoprevalentandsothoroughlyracializedthatviewersimagineablackperpetratoreven when none exists. In that study, 60 percent of viewers who saw a story with no image falselyrecalledseeingone,and70percentofthoseviewersbelievedtheperpetratortobeAfricanAmerican.33Decadesofcognitivebias researchdemonstrates thatbothunconsciousandconsciousbiases lead to

discriminatoryactions,evenwhenanindividualdoesnotwanttodiscriminate.34Thequotationcommonlyattributed to Nietzsche, that “there is no immaculate perception,” perfectly captures how cognitiveschemas—thoughtstructures—influencewhatwenoticeandhowthe thingswenoticeget interpreted.35Studieshaveshownthatracialschemasoperatenotonlyaspartofconscious,rationaldeliberations,butalsoautomatically—withoutconsciousawarenessor intent.36Onestudy, forexample, involvedavideogamethatplacedphotographsofwhiteandblackindividualsholdingeitheragunorotherobject(suchasa wallet, soda can, or cell phone) into various photographic backgrounds. Participants were told todecide as quickly as possiblewhether to shoot the target.Consistentwith earlier studies, participantsweremore likely tomistake a black target as armedwhen hewas not, andmistake awhite target asunarmed,when in facthewasarmed.37Thispatternofdiscrimination reflectedautomatic,unconsciousthoughtprocesses,notcarefuldeliberations.Most striking, perhaps, is the overwhelming evidence that implicit biasmeasures are disassociated

from explicit biasmeasures.38 In otherwords, the fact that youmay honestly believe that you are notbiasedagainstAfricanAmericans,andthatyoumayevenhaveblackfriendsorrelatives,doesnotmeanthatyouarefreefromunconsciousbias.Implicitbiastestsmaystillshowthatyouholdnegativeattitudesandstereotypesaboutblacks,eventhoughyoudonotbelieveyoudoanddonotwant to.39 In thestudydescribed above, for example, black participants showed an amount of “shooter bias” similar to thatshownbywhites.40Not surprisingly, peoplewhohave the greatest explicit bias (asmeasuredby self-reportedanswerstosurveyquestions)againstaracialgrouptendalsotohavethegreatestimplicitbias

against them, and vice versa.41 Yet there is often aweak correlation between degrees of explicit andimplicitbias;manypeoplewhothinktheyarenotbiasedprovewhentestedtohaverelativelyhighlevelsof bias.42 Unfortunately, a fairly consistent finding is that punitiveness and hostility almost alwaysincrease when people are primed—even subliminally—with images or verbal cues associated withAfrican Americans. In fact, studies indicate that people become increasingly harsh when an allegedcriminalisdarkerandmore“stereotypicallyblack”;theyaremorelenientwhentheaccusedislighterandappearsmorestereotypicallywhite.Thisistrueofjurorsaswellaslawenforcementofficers.43Viewedasawhole, therelevant researchbycognitiveandsocialpsychologists todatesuggests that

racial bias in the drugwarwas inevitable, once a public consensuswas constructed by political andmedia elites that drug crime is black and brown. Once blackness and crime, especially drug crime,became conflated in the public consciousness, the “criminalblackman,” as termed by legal scholarKathrynRussell,wouldinevitablybecometheprimarytargetoflawenforcement.44Somediscriminationwould be conscious and deliberate, as many honestly and consciously would believe that black mendeserveextrascrutinyandharshertreatment.Muchracialbias,though,wouldoperateunconsciouslyandautomatically—evenamonglawenforcementofficialsgenuinelycommitted toequal treatmentunder thelaw.Whetherornotonebelievesracialdiscriminationinthedrugwarwasinevitable,itshouldhavebeen

glaringly obvious in the 1980s and 1990s that an extraordinarily high risk of racial bias in theadministrationofcriminaljusticewaspresent,giventhewayinwhichallcrimehadbeenframedinthemediaandinpoliticaldiscourse.Awarenessofthisriskdidnotrequireintimatefamiliaritywithcognitivebias research. Anyone possessing a television set during this period would likely have had someawarenessoftheextenttowhichblackmenhadbeendemonizedintheWaronDrugs.TheriskthatAfricanAmericanswouldbeunfairlytargetedshouldhavebeenofspecialconcerntothe

U.S. Supreme Court—the one branch of government charged with the responsibility of protecting“discrete and insular minorities” from the excesses of majoritarian democracy, and guaranteeingconstitutionalrightsforgroupsdeemedunpopularorsubjecttoprejudice.45YetwhenthetimecamefortheSupremeCourttodevisethelegalrulesthatwouldgoverntheWaronDrugs,theCourtadoptedrulesthatwouldmaximize—notminimize—theamountofracialdiscriminationthatwouldlikelyoccur.Itthenclosedthecourthousedoorstoclaimsofracialbias.Whrenv.UnitedStatesisacaseinpoint.Asnotedinchapter2,theCourtheldinWhren thatpolice

officersarefreetouseminortrafficviolationsasanexcusetostopmotoristsfordruginvestigations—evenwhen there is no evidencewhatsoever that themotorist has engaged in drug crime.So long as aminortrafficviolation—suchasfailingtouseaturnsignal,exceedingthespeedlimitbyamileortwo,tracking improperlybetweenthe lines,orstoppingonapedestrianwalkway—canbe identified,policeare free to stop motorists for the purpose of engaging in a fishing expedition for drugs. Such policeconduct, theCourtconcluded,doesnotviolate theFourthAmendment’sbanon“unreasonablesearchesandseizures.”46Forgoodreason,thepetitionersinWhrenarguedthatgrantingpoliceofficerssuchbroaddiscretionto

investigatevirtuallyanyonefordrugcrimescreatedahighriskthatpolicewouldexercisetheirdiscretionina raciallydiscriminatorymanner.Withno requirement thatanyevidenceofdrugactivityactuallybepresentbeforelaunchingadruginvestigation,policeofficers’snapjudgmentsregardingwhoseemslikeadrugcriminalwouldlikelybeinfluencedbyprevailingracialstereotypesandbias.TheyurgedtheCourttoprohibit thepolice fromstoppingmotorists for thepurposeofdrug investigationsunless theofficersactuallyhadreasontobelieveamotoristwascommitting,orhadcommitted,adrugcrime.Failingtodoso,theyargued,wasunreasonableundertheFourthAmendmentandwouldexposeAfricanAmericanstoahighriskofdiscriminatorystopsandsearches.

NotonlydidtheCourtrejectthepetitioners’centralclaim—thatusingtrafficstopsasapretextfordruginvestigationsisunconstitutional—itruledthatclaimsofracialbiascouldnotbebroughtundertheFourthAmendment.Inotherwords,theCourtbarredanyvictimofracediscriminationbythepolicefromevenalleging a claim of racial bias under the FourthAmendment.According to theCourt,whether or notpolice discriminate on the basis of racewhenmaking traffic stops is irrelevant to a consideration ofwhethertheirconductis“reasonable”undertheFourthAmendment.TheCourt didoffer one caveat, however. It indicated that victimsof racediscrimination could still

state a claimunder the equalprotection clauseof theFourteenthAmendment,whichguarantees “equaltreatmentunderthelaws.”ThissuggestionmayhavebeenreassuringtothoseunfamiliarwiththeCourt’sequalprotectionjurisprudence.Butforthosewhohaveactuallytriedtoproveracediscriminationunderthe Fourteenth Amendment, the Court’s remark amounted to cruel irony. As we shall see below, theSupremeCourt hasmade it virtually impossible to challenge racial bias in the criminal justice systemunder the FourteenthAmendment, and it has barred litigation of such claims under federal civil rightslawsaswell.

ClosingtheCourthouseDoors—McCleskeyv.Kemp

First,considersentencing.In1987,whenmediahysteriaregardingblackdrugcrimewasatfeverpitchandtheeveningnewswassaturatedwithimagesofblackcriminalsshackledincourtrooms,theSupremeCourt ruled in McCleskey v. Kemp that racial bias in sentencing, even if shown through crediblestatistical evidence, could not be challenged under the FourteenthAmendment in the absence of clearevidence of conscious, discriminatory intent. On its face, the case appeared to be a straightforwardchallengetoGeorgia’sdeathpenaltyscheme.OncetheCourt’sopinionwasreleased,however,itbecameclearthecasewasaboutmuchmorethanthedeathpenalty.Therealissueathandwaswhether—andtowhatextent—theSupremeCourtwouldtolerateracialbiasinthecriminaljusticesystemasawhole.TheCourt’s answer was that racial bias would be tolerated—virtually to any degree—so long as no oneadmittedit.WarrenMcCleskeywasablackmanfacingthedeathpenaltyforkillingawhitepoliceofficerduringan

armedrobberyinGeorgia.RepresentedbytheNAACPLegalDefenseandEducationFund,McCleskeychallengedhisdeathsentenceonthegroundsthatGeorgia’sdeathpenaltyschemewasinfectedwithracialbias and thus violated the Fourteenth and Eighth Amendments. In support of his claim, he offered anexhaustivestudyofmorethantwothousandmurdercasesinGeorgia.ThestudywasknownastheBaldusstudy—namedafterProfessorDavidBaldus,whowas its lead author.The study found that defendantschargedwith killingwhite victims received the death penalty eleven timesmore often than defendantschargedwithkillingblackvictims.Georgiaprosecutorsseemedlargely toblamefor thedisparity; theysoughtthedeathpenaltyin70percentofcasesinvolvingblackdefendantsandwhitevictims,butonly19percentofcasesinvolvingwhitedefendantsandblackvictims.47Sensitive to the fact that numerous factors besides race can influence the decision making of

prosecutors,judges,andjuries,Baldusandhiscolleaguessubjectedtherawdatatohighlysophisticatedstatisticalanalysistoseeifnonracialfactorsmightexplainthedisparities.Yetevenafteraccountingforthirty-fivenonracialvariables, the researchers found thatdefendantschargedwithkillingwhitevictimswere4.3timesmorelikelytoreceiveadeathsentencethandefendantschargedwithkillingblacks.Blackdefendants,likeMcCleskey,whokilledwhitevictimshadthehighestchanceofbeingsentencedtodeathinGeorgia.48Thecasewascloselywatchedbycriminallawyersandcivilrightslawyersnationwide.Thestatistical

evidence of discrimination that Baldus had developed was the strongest ever presented to a courtregardingraceandcriminalsentencing.IfMcCleskey’sevidencewasnotenoughtoprovediscriminationintheabsenceofsomekindofracistutterance,whatwouldbe?By a one-vote margin, the Court rejected McCleskey’s claims under the Fourteenth Amendment,

insistingthatunlessMcCleskeycouldprovethattheprosecutorinhisparticularcasehadsoughtthedeathpenaltybecauseofraceorthatthejuryhadimposeditforracialreasons,thestatisticalevidenceofracediscrimination in Georgia’s death penalty system did not prove unequal treatment under the law. TheCourt accepted the statistical evidence as valid but insisted that evidence of conscious, racial bias inMcCleskey’s individual case was necessary to prove unlawful discrimination. In the absence of suchevidence,patternsofdiscrimination—evenpatternsasshockingasdemonstratedby theBaldusstudy—didnotviolatetheFourteenthAmendment.Inerecting thishigh standard, theCourtknew fullwell that the standardcouldnotbemet absent an

admission that a prosecutor or judge acted because of racial bias. The majority opinion openlyacknowledged that longstanding rules generally bar litigants from obtaining discovery from theprosecution regarding charging patterns and motives, and that similar rules forbid introduction ofevidenceof jurydeliberations evenwhen a juror has chosen tomakedeliberationspublic.49 The very

evidence that theCourtdemanded inMcCleskey—evidenceofdeliberatebias inhis individualcase—wouldalmostalwaysbeunavailableand/or inadmissibleduetoproceduralrules thatshield jurorsandprosecutorsfromscrutiny.ThisdilemmawasoflittleconcerntotheCourt.Itclosedthecourthousedoorstoclaimsofracialbiasinsentencing.There is good reason to believe that, despite appearances, theMcCleskey decision was not really

aboutthedeathpenaltyatall;rather, theCourt’sopinionwasdrivenbyadesiretoimmunizetheentirecriminaljusticesystemfromclaimsofracialbias.Thebestevidenceinsupportofthisviewcanbefoundat theendof themajorityopinionwhere theCourt states thatdiscretionplaysaneccessary role in theimplementation of the criminal justice system, and that discrimination is an inevitable by-product ofdiscretion. Racial discrimination, the Court seemed to suggest, was something that simply must betoleratedinthecriminaljusticesystem,providednooneadmitstoracialbias.The majority observed that significant racial disparities had been found in other criminal settings

beyond the death penalty, and thatMcCleskey’s case implicitly calls into question the integrity of theentiresystem.IntheCourt’swords:“Takentoitslogicalconclusion,[WarrenMcCleskey’sclaim]throwsinto serious question the principles that underlie our criminal justice system. . . . [I]f we acceptedMcCleskey’sclaimthat racialbiashas impermissibly tainted thecapitalsentencingdecision,wecouldsoonbe facedwithsimilarclaimsas toother typesofpenalty.”50TheCourtopenlyworried thatotheractors in the criminal justice systemmight also face scrunity for allegedly biased decision-making ifsimilarclaimsofracialbiasinthesystemwereallowedtoproceed.Drivenbytheseconcerns,theCourtrejectedMcCleskey’sclaimthatGeorgia’sdeathpenaltysystemviolatestheEighthAmendment’sbanonarbitrary punishment, framing the critical question as whether the Baldus study demonstrated a“constitutionallyunacceptablerisk”ofdiscrimination.Itsanswerwasno.TheCourtdeemedtheriskofracial bias in Georgia’s capital sentencing scheme “constitutionally acceptable.” Justice BrennanpointedlynotedinhisdissentthattheCourt’sopinion“seemstosuggestafearoftoomuchjustice.”51

CrackedUp—DiscriminatorySentencingintheWaronDrugs

Anyone who doubts the devastating impact ofMcCleskey v. Kemp on African American defendantsthroughout the criminal justice system, including those ensnared by theWar on Drugs, need only askEdwardClary.Twomonthsafterhiseighteenthbirthday,ClarywasstoppedandsearchedintheSt.Louisairportbecausehe“lookedlike”adrugcourier.Atthetime,hewasreturninghomefromvisitingsomefriendsinCalifornia.OneofthempersuadedhimtotakesomedrugsbackhometoSt.Louis.Claryhadneverattemptedtodealdrugsbefore,andhehadnocriminalrecord.During the search, the police found crack cocaine and promptly arrested him.Hewas convicted in

federal court and sentenced under federal laws that punish crack offenses one hundred times moreseverely than offenses involving powder cocaine. A conviction for the sale of five hundred grams ofpowdercocainetriggersafive-yearmandatorysentence,whileonlyfivegramsofcracktriggersthesamesentence.BecauseClaryhadbeencaughtwithmorethanfiftygramsofcrack(lessthantwoounces),thesentencingjudgebelievedhehadnochoicebuttosentencehim—aneighteen-year-old,first-timeoffender—toaminimumoftenyearsinfederalprison.Clary,likedefendantsinothercrackcases,challengedtheconstitutionalityofthehundred-to-oneratio.

His lawyers argued that the law is arbitrary and irrational, because it imposes such vastly differentpenaltiesontwoformsofthesamesubstance.TheyalsoarguedthatthelawdiscriminatesagainstAfricanAmericans,because themajorityof thosechargedwithcrimes involvingcrackat that timewereblack(approximately 93 percent of convicted crack offenders were black, 5 percent were white), whereaspowdercocaineoffenderswerepredominantlywhite.Every federal appellate court to have considered these claims had rejected themon the ground that

Congress—rightlyorwrongly—believedthatcrackwasmoredangeroustosociety,aviewsupportedbythe testimony of some drug-abuse “experts” and police officers. The fact thatmost of the evidence insupportofanydisparityhadsincebeendiscreditedwasdeemedirrelevant;whatmatteredwaswhetherthelawhadseemedrationalatthetimeitwasadopted.Congress,thecourtsconcluded,isfreetoamendthelawifcircumstanceshavechanged.Courtsalsohadrejectedclaimsthatcracksentencinglawswereraciallydiscriminatory,largelyonthe

ground that theSupremeCourt’s decision inMcCleskey v.Kemp precluded such a result. In the yearsfollowingMcCleskey , lowercourtsconsistently rejectedclaimsof racediscrimination in thecriminaljusticesystem,findingthatgrossracialdisparitiesdonotmeritstrictscrutinyintheabsenceofevidenceofexplicitracediscrimination—theveryevidenceunavailableintheeraofcolorblindness.JudgeClydeCahillof theFederalDistrictofMissouri,anAfricanAmerican judgeassignedClary’s

case, boldly challenged the prevailing view that courts are powerless to address forms of racediscrimination that are not overtly hostile. Cahill declared the hundred-to-one ratio raciallydiscriminatory in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, notwithstandingMcCleskey .52 Although noadmissionsofracialbiasor racist intentcouldbefoundin therecord,JudgeCahillbelievedracewasundeniably a factor in the crack sentencing laws and policies. He traced the history of the get-toughmovementandconcludedthatfearcoupledwithunconsciousracismhadledtoalynch-mobmentalityandadesire tocontrolcrime—andthosedeemedresponsiblefor it—atanycost.Cahillacknowledged thatmanypeoplemaynotbelievetheyaremotivatedbydiscriminatoryattitudesbutarguedthatweallhaveinternalized fear of young blackmen, a fear reinforced bymedia imagery that has helped to create anational image of the young blackmale as a criminal. “The presumption of innocence is now a legalmyth,” he declared. “The 100-to-1 ratio, coupled with mandatory minimum sentencing provided byfederal statute, has created a situation that reekswith inhumanity and injustice.... If youngwhitemaleswerebeingincarceratedatthesamerateasyoungblackmales,thestatutewouldhavebeenamendedlong

ago.” JudgeCahill sentencedClaryas if thedrughehadcarriedhomehadbeenpowder cocaine.Thesentenceimposedwasfouryearsinprison.Claryservedhistermandwasreleased.TheprosecutionappealedClary’scasetotheEighthCircuitCourtofAppeals,whichreversedJudge

Cahillinaunanimousopinion,findingthatthecasewasnotevenclose.Inthecourt’sview,therewasnocredibleevidencethatthecrackpenaltiesweremotivatedbyanyconsciousracialbigotry,asrequiredbyMcCleskeyv.Kemp.Thecourtremandedthecasebacktothedistrictcourtforresentencing.Clary—nowmarriedandafather—wasorderedbacktoprisontocompletehisten-yearterm.53Fewchallengestosentencingschemes,patterns,orresultshavebeenbroughtsinceMcCleskey,forthe

exerciseisplainlyfutile.Yetin1995,afewbravesoulschallengedtheimplementationofGeorgia’s“twostrikesandyou’reout”sentencingscheme,whichimposes life imprisonmentforaseconddrugoffense.Georgia’sdistrictattorneys,whohaveunbridleddiscretiontodecidewhethertoseekthisharshpenalty,hadinvokeditagainstonly1percentofwhitedefendantsfacingaseconddrugconvictionbutagainst16percent of blackdefendants.The resultwas that 98.4percent of those serving life sentencesunder theprovisionwereblack.TheGeorgiaSupremeCourt ruled, by a 4-3vote, that the stark racial disparitypresented a threshold case of discrimination and required the prosecutors to offer a race-neutralexplanationfortheresults.Ratherthanofferajustification,however,theGeorgiaattorneygeneralfiledapetition for rehearing signed by every one of the state’s forty-six district attorneys, all ofwhomwerewhite.ThepetitionarguedthattheCourt’sdecisionwasadiremistake;ifthedecisionwereallowedtostand and prosecutorswere compelled to explain gross racial disparities such as the ones at issue, itwould be a “substantial step toward invalidating” the death penalty andwould “paralyze the criminaljusticesystem”—apparentlybecausesevereandinexplicableracialdisparitiespervadedthesystemasawhole. Thirteen days later, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed itself, holding that the fact that 98.4percentofthedefendantsselectedtoreceivelifesentencesforrepeatdrugoffenseswereblackrequirednojustification.Thecourt’snewdecisionreliedalmostexclusivelyonMcCleskeyv.Kemp.Todate,notasingle successful challengehaseverbeenmade to racialbias in sentencingunderMcCleskey v.KempanywhereintheUnitedStates.

ChargingAhead—Armstrongv.UnitedStates

Ifsentencingweretheonlystageofthecriminaljusticeprocessinwhichracialbiaseswereallowedtoflourish, itwouldbea tragedyofgargantuanproportions.Thousandsofpeoplehavehadyearsof theirliveswastedinprison—yearstheywouldhavebeenfreeiftheyhadbeenwhite.Some,likeMcCleskey,havebeenkilledbecauseoftheinfluenceofraceinthedeathpenalty.Sentencing,however,isnottheend,but just the beginning.Aswe shall see, the legal rules governing prosecutions, like those that governsentencingdecisions,maximizeratherthanminimizeracialbiasinthedrugwar.TheSupremeCourthasgone togreat lengths toensure thatprosecutorsare free toexercise theirdiscretion inanymanner theychoose,andithasclosedthecourthousedoorstoclaimsofracialbias.Asdiscussedinchapter2,noonehasmorepowerinthecriminaljusticesystemthanprosecutors.Few

rulesconstraintheexerciseofprosecutorialdiscretion.Theprosecutorisfreetodismissacaseforanyreasonornoreasonatall,regardlessofthestrengthoftheevidence.Theprosecutorisalsofreetofilemore charges against a defendant than can realistically be proven in court, so long as probable causearguablyexists.Whetheragoodpleadealisofferedtoadefendantisentirelyuptotheprosecutor.Andifthemoodstrikes, theprosecutorcan transferdrugdefendants to thefederalsystem,where thepenaltiesarefarmoresevere.Juveniles,fortheirpart,canbetransferredtoadultcourt,wheretheycanbesenttoadultprison.AngelaJ.Davis,inherauthoritativestudyArbitraryJustice:ThePowerof theAmericanProsecutor, observes that “the most remarkable feature of these important, sometimes life-and-deathdecisions is that theyare totallydiscretionaryandvirtuallyunreviewable.”54Mostprosecutors’officeslack any manual or guidebook advising prosecutors how to make discretionary decisions. Even theAmericanBarAssociation’sstandardsofpracticeforprosecutorsarepurelyaspirational;noprosecutorisrequiredtofollowthestandardsorevenconsiderthem.ChristopherLeeArmstronglearnedthehardwaythattheSupremeCourthaslittleinterestinensuring

thatprosecutorsexercisetheirextraordinarydiscretioninamannerthatisfairandnondiscriminatory.He,alongwithfourofhiscompanions,wasstayingataLosAngelesmotelinApril1992whenfederalandstateagentsonajointdrugcrimetaskforceraidedtheirroomandarrestedthemonfederaldrugcharges—conspiracytodistributemorethanfiftygramsofcrackcocaine.ThefederalpublicdefendersassignedtoArmstrong’scaseweredisturbedbythefactthatArmstrongandhisfriendshadsomethingincommonwitheveryothercrackdefendanttheirofficehadrepresentedduringthepastthepastyear:theywereallblack.Infact,ofthefifty-threecrackcasestheirofficehadhandledoverthepriorthreeyears,forty-eightdefendantswereblack,fivewereHispanic,andnotasingleonewaswhite.Armstrong’slawyersfounditpuzzlingthatnowhitecrackoffendershadbeencharged,giventhatmostcrackoffendersarewhite.Theysuspectedthatwhiteswerebeingdivertedbyfederalprosecutorstothestatesystem,wherethepenaltiesforcrackoffenseswerefarlesssevere.Theonlywaytoprovethis,though,wouldbetogainaccesstotheprosecutors’recordsandfindoutjusthowmanywhitedefendantsweretransferredtothestatesystemandwhy.Armstrong’slawyersthusfiledamotionaskingthedistrictcourtfordiscoveryoftheprosecutors’filestosupporttheirclaimofselectiveprosecutionundertheFourteenthAmendment.Nearly one hundred years earlier, in a case called Yick Wo v. Hopkins, the Supreme Court had

recognizedthatraciallyselectiveenforcementviolatesequalprotectionofthelaws.Inthatcase,decidedin1886,theCourtunanimouslyoverturnedconvictionsoftwoChinesemenwhowereoperatinglaundrieswithoutalicense.SanFranciscohaddeniedlicensestoallChineseapplicants,butgrantedlicensestoallbutoneofthenon-Chineselaundryoperatorswhoapplied.Lawenforcementarrestedmorethanahundredpeopleforoperatinglaundrieswithoutlicenses,andeveryoneofthearresteeswasChinese.OverturningYickWo’sconviction,theSupremeCourtdeclaredinawidelyquotedpassage,“Thoughthelawitselfbefaironitsface,andimpartialinappearance,yet,ifitisappliedandadministeredbypublicauthoritywith

anevil eyeandanunequalhand, soaspractically tomakeunjust and illegaldiscriminations,betweenpersons in similar circumstances . . . the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of theConstitution.”55Armstrong’slawyerssoughttoprovethat,likethelawatissueinYickWo,federalcracklawswerefairontheirfaceandimpartialintheirappearance,butwereselectivelyenforcedinaraciallydiscriminatorymanner.InsupportoftheirclaimthatArmstrongshould,attheveryleast,beentitledtodiscovery,Armstrong’s

lawyersoffered twoswornaffidavits.Onewas fromahalfwayhouse intakecoordinatorwho testifiedthat, in his experience treating crack addicts, whites and blacks dealt and used the drugs in similarproportions. The other affidavit was from a defense attorney who had extensive experience in stateprosecutions.Hetestifiedthatnonblackdefendantswereroutinelyprosecutedinstate,ratherthanfederal,court.Arguably the best evidence in support ofArmstrong’s claims came from the government,whichsubmittedalistofmorethantwothousandpeoplechargedwithfederalcrackcocaineviolationsoverathree-yearperiod,allbutelevenofwhomwereblack.Nonewerewhite.Thedistrictcourtruledthattheevidencepresentedwassufficienttojustifydiscoveryforthepurposes

ofdeterminingwhether theallegationsof selectiveenforcementwerevalid.Theprosecutors,however,refused to release any records and appealed the issue all theway to theU.S. SupremeCourt. InMay1996, the Supreme Court reversed. As inMcCleskey, the Court did not question the accuracy of theevidence submitted, but ruled that because Armstrong failed to identify any similarly situated whitedefendants who should have been charged in federal court but were not, he was not entitled even todiscoveryonhisselective-prosecutionclaim.Withnotraceofirony,theCourtdemandedthatArmstrongproduce inadvance thevery thinghe sought indiscovery: information regardingwhitedefendantswhoshould have been charged in federal court. That information, of course, was in the prosecution’spossessionandcontrol,whichiswhyArmstrongfiledadiscoverymotioninthefirstplace.AsaresultoftheArmstrongdecision,defendantswhosuspectracialbiasonthepartofprosecutorsare

trappedinaclassiccatch-22.Inordertostateaclaimofselectiveprosecution,theyarerequiredtoofferinadvance theveryevidencethatgenerallycanbeobtainedonlythroughdiscoveryof theprosecutor’sfiles.TheCourtjustifiedthisinsurmountablehurdleonthegroundsthatconsiderabledeferenceisowedtheexerciseofprosecutorialdiscretion.Unlessevidenceofconscious,intentionalbiasonthepartoftheprosecutorcouldbeproduced, theCourtwouldnotallowany inquiry into thereasonsfororcausesofapparentracialdisparitiesinprosecutorialdecisionmaking.Againthecourthousedoorswereclosed,forallpracticalpurposes,toclaimsofracialbiasintheadministrationofthecriminaljusticesystem.Immunizingprosecutorsfromclaimsofracialbiasandfailingtoimposeanymeaningfulcheckonthe

exerciseoftheirdiscretionincharging,pleabargaining,transferringcases,andsentencinghascreatedanenvironmentinwhichconsciousandunconsciousbiasesareallowedtoflourish.Numerousstudieshaveshownthatprosecutorsinterpretandrespondtoidenticalcriminalactivitydifferentlybasedontheraceofthe offender.56 One widely cited study was conducted by the San Jose Mercury News. The studyreviewed700,000criminalcasesthatwerematchedbycrimeandcriminalhistoryofthedefendant.Theanalysis revealed that similarly situatedwhiteswere farmore successful thanAfricanAmericans andLatinosinthepleabargainingprocess;infact,“atvirtuallyeverystageofpretrialnegotiation,whitesaremoresuccessfulthannonwhites.”57Themostcomprehensivestudiesofracialbiasintheexerciseofprosecutorialandjudicialdiscretion

involve the treatmentof juveniles.These studieshave shown that youthof color aremore likely tobearrested, detained, formally charged, transferred to adult court, and confined to secure residentialfacilities than theirwhite counterparts.58A report in 2000observed that amongyouthwhohaveneverbeensenttoajuvenileprisonbefore,AfricanAmericansweremorethansixtimesaslikelyaswhitestobe sentenced to prison for identical crimes.59 A study sponsored by the U.S. Justice Department and

several of the nation’s leading foundations, published in 2007, found that the impact of the biasedtreatmentismagnifiedwitheachadditionalstepintothecriminaljusticesystem.AfricanAmericanyouthaccountfor16percentofallyouth,28percentofalljuvenilearrests,35percentoftheyouthwaivedtoadultcriminalcourt,and58percentofyouthadmitted tostateadultprison.60Amajor reason for thesedisparities is unconscious and conscious racial biases infecting decision making. In the state ofWashington, for example, a review of juvenile sentencing reports found that prosecutors routinelydescribed black and white offenders differently.61 Blacks committed crimes because of internalpersonalityflawssuchasdisrespect.Whitesdidsobecauseofexternalconditionssuchasfamilyconflict.The risk that prosecutorial discretion will be racially biased is especially acute in the drug

enforcementcontext,wherevirtuallyidenticalbehaviorissusceptibletoawidevarietyofinterpretationsandresponsesandthemediaimageryandpoliticaldiscoursehasbeensothoroughlyracialized.Whetherakidisperceivedasadangerousdrug-dealingthugorinsteadisviewedasagoodkidwhowasmerelyexperimentingwithdrugsandsellingtoafewofhisfriendshastodowiththewaysinwhichinformationabout illegal drug activity is processed and interpreted, in a social climate in which drug dealing israciallydefined.AsaformerU.S.Attorneyexplained:

Ihadan[assistantU.S.attorneywho]wantedtodropthegunchargeagainstthedefendant[inacasein which] there were no extenuating circumstances. I asked, “Why do you want to drop the gunoffense?”Andhesaid,“‘He’saruralguyandgrewuponafarm.Thegunhehadwithhimwasarifle.He’sagoodol’boy,andallgoodol’boyshaverifles,andit’snotlikehewasagun-totingdrugdealer.”Buthewasagun-totingdrugdealer,exactly.

The decision in Armstrong effectively shields this type of biased decision making from judicialscrutiny for racial bias. Prosecutors arewell aware that the exercise of their discretion is unchecked,providednoexplicitlyracistremarksaremade,asitisnexttoimpossiblefordefendantstoproveracialbias. It isdifficult to imaginea systembetterdesigned toensure that racialbiasesand stereotypesaregivenfreereign—whileatthesametimeappearingonthesurfacetobecolorblind—thantheonedevisedbytheU.S.SupremeCourt.

InDefenseoftheAll-WhiteJury—Purkettv.Elm

TherulesgoverningjuryselectionprovideyetanotherillustrationoftheCourt’scompleteabdicationofits responsibility to guarantee racial minorities equal treatment under the law. In 1985, in Batson v.Kentucky,theCourtheldthattheFourteenthAmendmentprohibitsprosecutorsfromdiscriminatingonthebasis of racewhen selecting juries, a ruling hailed as an important safeguard against all-white jurieslockingupAfricanAmericansbasedonracialbiasesandstereotypes.PriortoBatson,prosecutorshadbeenallowedtostrikeblacksfromjuries,providedtheydidnotalwaysstrikeblackjurors.TheSupremeCourt had ruled in 1965, in Swain v. Alabama, that an equal-protection claim would arise only if adefendantcouldprovethataprosecutorstruckAfricanAmericanjurorsineverycase,regardlessofthecrimeinvolvedorregardlessoftheracesofthedefendantorthevictim.62Twodecadeslater,inBatson,the Supreme Court reversed course, a nod to the newly minted public consensus that explicit racediscriminationisanaffronttoAmericanvalues.AlmostimmediatelyafterBatsonwasdecided,however,it became readily apparent that prosecutors had no difficulty circumventing the formal requirement ofcolorblindnessinjuryselectionbymeansofaformofsubterfugetheCourtwouldcometoaccept,ifnotendorse.Thehistoryofracediscriminationinjuryselectiondatesbacktoslavery.Until1860,noblackperson

hadeversatona jury in theUnitedStates.During theReconstructionera,AfricanAmericansbegan toserve on juries in the South for the first time. The all-white jury promptly returned, however, whenDemocraticconservativessoughtto“redeem”theSouthbystrippingblacksoftheirrighttovoteandtheirrighttoserveonjuries.In1880,theSupremeCourtintervened,strikingdownaWestVirginiastatutethatexpressly reserved jury service to white men. Citing the recently enacted Fourteenth Amendment, theCourtdeclaredthattheexclusionofblacksfromjuryservicewas“practicallyabranduponthem,affixedbylaw,anassertionoftheirinferiority,andastimulanttothatraceprejudicewhichisanimpedimentto...equaljustice.”63TheCourtasked,“HowcanitbemaintainedthatcompellingacoloredmantosubmittoatrialforhislifebyajurydrawnfromapanelfromwhichtheStatehasexpresslyexcludedeverymanofhisrace,becauseofhiscoloralone,howeverwellqualifiedinotherrespects,isnotadenialtohimofequalprotection?”64Forall itsbluster, theCourtofferednomeaningfulprotectionagainst jurydiscriminationintheyears

thatfollowed.AslegalscholarBennoSchmidthasobserved,fromtheendofReconstructionthroughtheNewDeal,“thesystematicexclusionofblackmenfromSouthernjurieswasaboutasplainasanylegaldiscrimination could be short of proclamation in state statutes or confession by state officials.”65 TheSupremeCourtrepeatedlyupheldconvictionsofblackdefendantsbyall-whitejuriesinsituationswhereexclusionofblackjurorswasobvious.66TheonlycaseinwhichtheCourtoverturnedaconvictiononthegroundsofdiscriminationinjuryselectionwasNealv.Delaware,acasedecidedin1935.StatelawinDelawareoncehadexplicitlyrestrictedjuryservicetowhitemen,and“nocoloredcitizenhadeverbeensummonedasajuror.”67TheDelawareSupremeCourthadrejectedNeal’sequalprotectionclaimonthegroundthat“thegreatbodyofblackmenresidinginthisStateareutterlyunqualified[forjuryservice]bywant of intelligence, experience, or moral integrity.”68 The Supreme Court reversed. Clearly, whatoffended theU.S. SupremeCourtwas not the exclusion of blacks from jury service per se, but ratherdoingsoopenlyandexplicitly.Thatorientationcontinuestoholdtoday.NotwithstandingBatson’s formal prohibition on race discrimination in jury selection, the Supreme

Courtandlowerfederalcourtshavetoleratedallbutthemostegregiousexamplesofracialbiasinjuryselection.Miller El v. Cockrell was such a case.69 That case involved a jury-selection manual thatsanctionedrace-basedselection.TheCourtnotedthatitwasunclearwhethertheofficialpolicyofrace-

basedexclusionwasstillineffect,buttheprosecutiondidinfactexcludetenofelevenblackjurors,inpartbyemployinganunusualpracticeof“juryshuffling”thatreducedthenumberofblackjurors.70Theprosecutionalsoengagedindisparatequestioningofjurorsbasedonrace—practicesthatseemedlinkedto the jury-selection manual. This was a highly unusual case. In typical cases, there are no officialpolicies authorizing race discrimination in jury selection still lurking around, arguably in effect.Normally, the discrimination is obvious yet unstated, and the systematic exclusion of black jurorscontinueslargelyunabatedthroughuseoftheperemptorystrike.Peremptorystrikeshavelongbeencontroversial.Bothprosecutorsanddefenseattorneysarepermitted

tostrike“peremptorily”jurorstheydon’tlike—thatis,peopletheybelievewillnotrespondfavorablytotheevidenceorwitnesses they intend topresentat trial. In theory,peremptorystrikesmay increase thefairness of the proceeding by eliminating jurors who may be biased but whose biases cannot bedemonstrated convincingly to a judge. In practice, however, peremptory challenges are notoriouslydiscriminatory. Lawyers typically have little information about potential jurors, so their decisions tostrike individual jurors tend to be based on nothing more than stereotypes, prejudices, and hunches.Achievinganall-whitejury,ornearlyall-whitejury,iseasyinmostjurisdictions,becauserelativelyfewracialminoritiesareincludedinthejurypool.PotentialjurorsaretypicallycalledforservicebasedonthelistofregisteredvotersorDepartmentofMotorVehiclelists—sourcesthatcontaindisproportionatelyfewerpeopleof color, becausepeopleof color are significantly less likely toowncars or register tovote.Makingmatters worse, thirty-one states and the federal government subscribe to the practice oflifetime felon exclusion from juries. As a result, about 30 percent of black men are automaticallybannedfromjuryserviceforlife.71Accordingly,nomorethanahandfulofstrikesarenecessaryinmanycasestoeliminateallornearlyallblackjurors.ThepracticeofsystematicallyexcludingblackjurorshasnotbeenhaltedbyBatson;theonlythingthathaschangedisthatprosecutorsmustcomeupwitharace-neutralexcuseforthestrikes—anexceedinglyeasytask.Infact,onecomprehensivestudyreviewedallpublisheddecisionsinvolvingBatsonchallengesfrom

1986 to 1992 and concluded that prosecutors almost never fail to successfully craft acceptable race-neutralexplanationstojustifystrikingblackjurors.72Courtsacceptexplanationsthatjurorsaretooyoung,tooold, too conservative, too liberal, too comfortable, or toouncomfortable.Clothing is also favoritereason;jurorshavebeenstrickenforwearinghatsorsunglasses.Evenexplanationsthatmightcorrelatewith race, such as lack of education, unemployment, poverty, being single, living in the sameneighborhood as the defendant, or prior involvement with the criminal justice system—have all beenaccepted as perfectly good, non-pretextual excuses for striking African Americans from juries. Asprofessor Sheri Lynn Johnson once remarked, “If prosecutors existwho . . . cannot create a ‘raciallyneutral’reasonfordiscriminatingonthebasisofrace,barexamsaretooeasy.”73GivenhowflagrantlyprosecutorswereviolatingBatson’sbanonracediscriminationinjuryselection,

itwasreasonabletohopethat,ifpresentedwithaparticularlyrepugnantcase,theSupremeCourtmightbewillingtodrawthelineatpracticesthatmakeamockeryoftheantidiscriminationprinciple.Granted,the Court had been unwilling to accept statistical proof of race discrimination in sentencing inMcCleskey,andithadbrushedoffconcernsofracialbiasindiscretionarypolicestopsinWhren,andithadgrantedvirtualimmunitytoprosecutorsintheirchargingdecisionsinArmstrong,butwoulditgosofarastoallowprosecutorstoofferblatantlyabsurd,downrightlaughableexcusesforstrikingblacksfromjuries?Itturnsouttheanswerwasyes.InPurkettv.Elm,in1995,theSupremeCourtruledthatanyrace-neutralreason,nomatterhowsilly,

ridiculous, or superstitious, is enough to satisfy the prosecutor’s burden of showing that a pattern ofstriking aparticular racial group is not, in fact, basedon race. In that case, theprosecutoroffered thefollowingexplanationtojustifyhisstrikesofblackjurors:

I struck [juror] number twenty-two because of his long hair. He had long curly hair. He had thelongesthairofanybodyonthepanelbyfar.Heappearednottobeagoodjurorforthatfact....Also,hehadamustacheandagoateetypebeard.Andjurornumbertwenty-fouralsohadamustacheandgoateetypebeard....AndIdon’tlikethewaytheylooked,withthewaythehairiscut,bothofthem.Andthemustachesandthebeardslooksuspicioustome.74

TheCourtofAppeals for theEighthCircuit ruled that the foregoingexplanation for theprosecutor’sstrikesofblackjurorswasinsufficientandshouldhavebeenrejectedbythetrialcourtbecauselonghairandfacialhairarenotplausiblyrelatedtoaperson’sability toperformasa juror.Theappellatecourtexplained:“Wheretheprosecutionstrikesaprospectivejurorwhoisamemberofthedefendant’sracialgroup,solelyonthebasisoffactorswhicharefaciallyirrelevanttothequestionofwhetherthatpersonisqualifiedtoserveasajurorintheparticularcase,theprosecutionmustatleastarticulatesomeplausibleraceneutralreasonforbelievingthatthosefactorswillsomehowaffecttheperson’sabilitytoperformhisorherdutiesasajuror.”75TheU.S.SupremeCourtreversed,holdingthatwhenapatternofrace-basedstrikeshasbeenidentified

bythedefense,theprosecutorneednotprovide“anexplanationthatispersuasive,orevenplausible.”76Oncethereasonisoffered,atrialjudgemaychoosetobelieve(ordisbelieve)any“sillyorsuperstitious”reasonofferedbyprosecutorstoexplainapatternofstrikesthatappeartobebasedonrace.77TheCourtsentaclearmessagethatappellatecourtsarelargelyfreetoacceptthereasonsofferedbyaprosecutorforexcludingprospectiveblackjurors—nomatterhowirrationalorabsurdthereasonsmayseem.

TheOccupation—PolicingtheEnemy

The Court’s blind eye to race discrimination in the criminal justice system has been especiallyproblematicinpolicing.Racialbiasismostacuteat thepointofentryintothesystemfortworeasons:discretionandauthorization.Althoughprosecutors, as agroup,have thegreatestpower in thecriminaljusticesystem,policehavethegreatestdiscretion—discretionthatisamplifiedindrug-lawenforcement.Andunbeknownsttothegeneralpublic,theSupremeCourthasactuallyauthorizedracediscriminationinpolicing,ratherthanadoptinglegalrulesbanningit.Raciallybiasedpolicediscretion is key tounderstandinghow theoverwhelmingmajorityof people

whogetsweptintothecriminaljusticesystemintheWaronDrugsturnouttobeblackorbrown,eventhough the police adamantly deny that they engage in racial profiling. In the drug war, police havediscretionregardingwhomtotarget(whichindividuals),aswellaswheretotarget(whichneighborhoodsor communities).Asnotedearlier, at least10percentofAmericansviolatedrug lawseveryyear, andpeople of all races engage in illegal drug activity at similar rates.With such an extraordinarily largepopulationofoffenders tochoose from,decisionsmustbemade regardingwhoshouldbe targetedandwherethedrugwarshouldbewaged.Fromtheoutset,thedrugwarcouldhavebeenwagedprimarilyinoverwhelminglywhitesuburbsoron

college campuses. SWAT teams could have rappelled fromhelicopters in gated suburban communitiesand raided thehomesofhigh school lacrosseplayersknown forhostingcokeandecstasypartiesaftertheirgames.Thepolicecouldhaveseizedtelevisions,furniture,andcashfromfraternityhousesbasedonan anonymous tip that a few joints or a stash of cocaine could be found hidden in someone’s dresserdrawer.Suburbanhomemakerscouldhavebeenplacedundersurveillanceandsubjected toundercoveroperationsdesignedtocatchthemviolatinglawsregulatingtheuseandsaleofprescription“uppers.”Allofthiscouldhavehappenedasamatterofroutineinwhitecommunities,butitdidnot.Instead, when police go looking for drugs, they look in the ’hood. Tactics that would be political

suicideinanupscalewhitesuburbarenotevennewsworthyinpoorblackandbrowncommunities.Solongasmassdrugarrestsareconcentratedinimpoverishedurbanareas,policechiefshavelittlereasontofearapoliticalbacklash,nomatterhowaggressiveandwarlike theeffortsmaybe.Andso longas thenumberofdrugarrestsincreasesoratleastremainshigh,federaldollarscontinuetoflowinandfillthedepartment’scoffers.Asoneformerprosecutorputit,“It’saloteasiertogoouttothe’hood,sotospeak,andpicksomebodythantoputyourresourcesinanundercover[operationina]communitywheretherearepotentiallypoliticallypowerfulpeople.”78Thehypersegregationoftheblackpooringhettocommunitieshasmadetheroundupeasy.Confinedto

ghetto areas and lacking political power, the black poor are convenient targets. DouglasMassey andNancyDenton’sbook,AmericanApartheid,documentshowraciallysegregatedghettosweredeliberatelycreatedbyfederalpolicy,notimpersonalmarketforcesorprivatehousingchoices.79TheenduringracialisolationoftheghettopoorhasmadethemuniquelyvulnerableintheWaronDrugs.Whathappenstothemdoesnotdirectlyaffect—andisscarcelynoticedby—theprivilegedbeyondtheghetto’sinvisiblewalls.Thus it ishere, in thepoverty-stricken,raciallysegregatedghettos,where theWaronPovertyhasbeenabandonedandfactorieshavedisappeared,thatthedrugwarhasbeenwagedwiththegreatestferocity.SWATteamsaredeployedhere;buy-and-bustoperationsareconcentratedhere;drugraidsofapartmentbuildingsoccurhere;stop-and-friskoperationsoccuronthestreetshere.Blackandbrownyoutharetheprimarytargets.Itisnotuncommonforayoungblackteenagerlivinginaghettocommunitytobestopped,interrogated, and frisked numerous times in the course of a month, or even a single week, often byparamilitary units. Studies of racial profiling typically report the total number of people stopped andsearched, disaggregated by race.These studies have led somepolicing experts to conclude that racial

profilingisactually“worse”inwhitecommunities,becausetheracialdisparitiesinstopandsearchratesaremuchgreaterthere.Whatthesestudiesdonotreveal,however,isthefrequencywithwhichanygivenindividualislikelytobestoppedinspecific,raciallydefinedneighborhoods.Themilitarized nature of law enforcement in ghetto communities has inspired rap artists and black

youth to refer to the police presence in black communities as “The Occupation.” In these occupiedterritories,manyblackyouthautomatically“assumetheposition”whenapatrolcarpullsup,knowingfullwell that theywillbedetainedand friskednomatterwhat.Thisdynamicoftencomesas a surprise tothosewhohavespentlittletimeinghettos.CraigFutterman,alawprofessorattheUniversityofChicago,reports thathisstudentsfrequentlyexpressshockanddismaywhentheyventure into thosecommunitiesfor the first time and witness the distance between abstract legal principles and actual practice. Onestudent reported, following her ride-along with Chicago police: “Each time we drove into a publichousingprojectandstoppedthecar,everyyoungblackmanintheareawouldalmostreflexivelyplacehishandsup against the car and spreadhis legs tobe searched.And theofficerswould search them.Theofficerswould thengetback in thecar and stop inanotherproject, and thiswouldhappenagain.Thisrepeated itself throughout theentireday. Icouldn’tbelieve it.Thiswasnothing likewelearned in lawschool.Butitjustseemedsonormal—forthepoliceandtheyoungmen.”Numerous scholars (andmany lawenforcementofficials) attempt to justify theconcentrationofdrug

lawenforcementresourcesinghettocommunitiesonthegroundthatitiseasierforthepolicetocombatillegaldrugactivitythere.ThetheoryisthatblackandLatinodrugusersaremorelikelythanwhiteuserstoobtainillegaldrugsinpublicspacesthatarevisibletothepolice,andthereforeitismoreefficientandconvenient for the police to concentrate their efforts on open-air drugmarkets in ghetto communities.Sociologistshavebeenmajorproponentsofthislineofreasoning,pointingoutthatdifferentialaccesstoprivatespaceinfluencesthelikelihoodthatcriminalbehaviorwillbedetected.Becausepoorpeoplelackaccesstoprivatespace(oftensharingsmallapartmentswithnumerousfamilymembersorrelatives),theircriminal activity is more likely to be conducted outdoors. Concentrating law enforcement efforts inlocationswhere drug activitywill bemore easily detected is viewed as a race-neutral organizationalnecessity. This argument is often buttressed by claims that most citizen complaints about illegal drugactivitycomefromghettoareas,andthattheviolenceassociatedwiththedrugtradeoccursininnercities.These facts, drugwar defenders claim,make the decision towage the drugwar almost exclusively inpoorcommunitiesofcoloraneasyandlogicalchoice.Thislineofreasoningisweakerthanitinitiallyappears.Manylawenforcementofficialsacknowledge

that the demand for illegal drugs is so great—and the lack of alternative sources of income so few inghettocommunities—that“ifyoutakeonedealeroffthestreet,he’llbereplacedwithinanhour.”Manyalsoadmit thatapredictableconsequenceofbreakinguponedrugring isaslewofviolenceasothersfightforcontrolofthepreviouslystabilizedmarket.80Theserealitiessuggest—ifthepasttwodecadesofendless war somehow did not—that the drugwar is doomed to fail. They also call into question thelegitimacyof“convenience”asanexcusefor themass imprisonmentofblackandbrownmeninghettocommunities.Even putting aside such concerns, though, recent research indicates that the basic assumptions upon

whichdrugwar defenses typically rest are simplywrong.The conventionalwisdom—that “get tough”tacticsarearegrettablenecessityinpoorcommunitiesofcolorandthatefficiencyrequiresthedrugwartobewagedinthemostvulnerableneighborhoods—turnsouttobe,asmanyhavelongsuspected,nothingmorethanwartimepropaganda,notsoundpolicy.

UnconventionalWisdom

In2002,a teamofresearchersat theUniversityofWashingtondecidedto takethedefensesof thedrugwarseriously,bysubjectingtheargumentstoempiricaltestinginamajorstudyofdrug-lawenforcementinaraciallymixedcity—Seattle.81Thestudyfoundthat,contrarytotheprevailing“commonsense,”thehigh arrest rates of African Americans in drug-law enforcement could not be explained by rates ofoffending; nor could they be explained by other standard excuses, such as the ease and efficiency ofpolicingopen-airdrugmarkets,citizencomplaints,crimerates,ordrug-relatedviolence.Thestudyalsodebunked the assumption that white drug dealers deal indoors, making their criminal activity moredifficulttodetect.Theauthorsfoundthatitwasuntruestereotypesaboutcrackmarkets,crackdealers,andcrackbabies—

not facts—thatweredrivingdiscretionarydecisionmakingby theSeattlePoliceDepartment.The factswere as follows: Seattle residents were far more likely to report suspected narcotics activities inresidences—not outdoors—but police devoted their resources to open-air drugmarkets and to the oneprecinctthatwasleastlikelytobeidentifiedasthesiteofsuspecteddrugactivityincitizencomplaints.Infact, although hundreds of outdoor drug transactions were recorded in predominantly white areas ofSeattle, police concentrated their drug enforcement efforts in one downtown drug market where thefrequencyofdrug transactionswasmuchlower. Inraciallymixedopen-airdrugmarkets,blackdealerswerefarmorelikelytobearrestedthanwhites,eventhoughwhitedealerswerepresentandvisible.Andthe department focused overwhelmingly on crack—the one drug in Seattle more likely to be sold byAfricanAmericans—despitethefactthatlocalhospitalrecordsindicatedthatoverdosedeathsinvolvingheroinweremore numerous than all overdose deaths for crack and powder cocaine combined. LocalpoliceacknowledgedthatnosignificantlevelofviolencewasassociatedwithcrackinSeattleandthatotherdrugswerecausingmorehospitalizations,butsteadfastlymaintainedthattheirdeploymentdecisionswerenondiscriminatory.Thestudy’sauthorsconcluded,basedontheirreviewandanalysisoftheempiricalevidence,thatthe

SeattlePoliceDepartment’sdecisionstofocussoheavilyoncrack,tothenearexclusionofotherdrugs,andtoconcentrateitseffortsonoutdoordrugmarketsindowntownareasratherthandrugmarketslocatedindoorsorinpredominantlywhitecommunities,reflect“aracializedconceptionofthedrugproblem.”82Astheauthorsputit:“[TheSeattlePoliceDepartment’s]focusonblackandLatinoindividualsandonthedrugmost stronglyassociatedwith ‘blackness’ suggest that lawenforcementpoliciesandpracticesarepredicatedontheassumptionthatthedrugproblemis,infact,ablackandLatinoone,andthatcrack,thedrugmoststronglyassociatedwithurbanblacks, is ‘theworst.’”83This racializedculturalscriptaboutwho and what constitutes the drug problem renders illegal drug activity by whites invisible. “Whitepeople,” the study’s authors observed, “are simply not perceived as drug offenders by Seattle policeofficers.”84

HollowHope

Onemight imagine that the factsdescribedabovewouldprovidegrounds fora lawsuit challenging theSeattle Police Department’s drug war tactics as a violation of the equal protection clause of theFourteenthAmendmentanddemandingreform.Afterall,obtainingreformthroughthecitycouncilorstatelegislaturemayseemunlikely,forblack“criminals”areperhapsthemostdespisedminorityintheU.S.population. Few politicians will leap at the opportunity to support black people labeled criminals.Accordingly,a lawsuitmayseem like thebestoption.ThepurposeofourConstitution—especially theFourteenth Amendment’s equal-protection guarantee—is to protect minority rights even when, orespecially when, they are unpopular. So shouldn’t African American defendants be able to file asuccessfullawsuitdemandinganendtothesediscriminatorypracticesorchallengetheirdrugarrestsonthegroundsthattheselawenforcementpracticesareunlawfullytaintedbyrace?Theanswerisyes,theyshould,butno,theyprobablycan’t.AslegalscholarDavidColehasobserved,“TheCourthasimposednearlyinsurmountablebarriersto

personschallengingracediscriminationatallstagesofthecriminaljusticesystem.”85Thebarriersaresohigh that few lawsuits are even filed, notwithstanding shocking and indefensible racial disparities.Proceduralhurdles,suchasthe“standingrequirement,”havemadeitvirtuallyimpossibletoseekreformoflawenforcementagenciesthroughthejudicialprocess,evenwhenthepoliciesorpracticesatissueareillegalorplainlydiscriminatory.Adolph Lyons’s attempt to ban the use of lethal chokeholds by the LosAngeles PoliceDepartment

(LAPD)isagoodexample.Lyons,atwenty-four-year-oldblackman,wasdrivinghiscarinLosAngelesonemorningwhenhewaspulledoverbyfourpoliceofficersforaburnt-outtaillight.Withgunsdrawn,policeorderedLyonsoutofhiscar.Heobeyed.Theofficerstoldhimtofacethecar,spreadhislegs,andput his hands on his head.Again,Lyons did as hewas told.After the officers completed a pat-down,Lyons dropped his hands, prompting an officer to slam Lyons’s hands back on his head.When Lyonscomplained that the car keys he was holding were causing him pain, the officer forced Lyons into achokehold.Helostconsciousnessandcollapsed.Whenheawoke,“hewasspittingupbloodanddirt,hadurinatedanddefecated,andhadsufferedpermanentdamagetohislarynx.”86Theofficersissuedatrafficticketfortheburnt-outtaillightandreleasedhim.LyonssuedtheCityofLosAngelesforviolationofhisconstitutionalrightsandsought,asaremedy,a

banagainstfutureuseofthechokeholds.BythetimehiscasereachedtheSupremeCourt,sixteenpeoplehadbeenkilledbypoliceuseofthechokehold,twelveofthemblackmen.TheSupremeCourtdismissedthecase,however,rulingthatLyonslacked“standing”toseekaninjunctionagainstthedeadlypractice.Inorder tohave standing, theCourt reasoned,Lyonswouldhave to show thathewashighly likely tobesubjecttoachokeholdagain.Lyonsarguedthat,asablackman,hehadgoodreasontofearhewouldbestoppedbythepolicefora

minortrafficviolationandsubjectedtoachokeholdagain.Hehaddonenothingtoprovokethechokehold;tothecontrary,hehadobeyedinstructionsandcooperatedfully.Whywouldn’thebelievehewasatriskofbeingstoppedandchokedagain?TheCourt,however,ruledthatinordertohavestanding

Lyonswouldhavehadnotonlytoallegethathewouldhaveanotherencounterwiththepolicebutalsotomaketheincredibleassertioneither(1)thatallpoliceofficersinLosAngelesalwayschokeanycitizenwithwhomtheyhaveanencounter,whetherforthepurposeofarrest,issuingacitationorforquestioning,or(2)thattheCityorderedorauthorizedthepolicetoactinsuchamanner.87

Lyonsdidnotallegeracediscrimination,butifhehad,thatclaimwouldalmostcertainlyhavebeenaloser too. The Court’s ruling in Lyons makes it extremely difficult to challenge systemic race

discriminationinlawenforcementandobtainmeaningfulpolicyreform.Forexample,AfricanAmericansinSeattlewhohopetoendtheSeattlepolicedepartment’sdiscriminatorytacticsthroughlitigationwouldbe required to prove that they plan to violate drug laws and that theywill almost certainly face racediscriminationbySeattlepoliceofficersengagedindrug-lawenforcement, inorder tohavestandingtoseekreform—i.e.,justtogetinthecourthousedoor.ItisworthyofnotethattheLyonsstandarddoesnotapplytosuitsfordamages.Butanysuggestionthat

litigants need not worry about policy reform because they can always sue for damages would bedisingenuous—particularlyasappliedtoracediscriminationcases.Why?Neitherthestatenorthestatepolicecanbesuedfordamages.Inaseriesofcases, theSupremeCourthasruledthat thestateanditsoffices are immune from federal suits for damages under the EleventhAmendment to the Constitution(unlesstheyconsent),andthestatecan’tbesuedfordamagesforconstitutionalviolationsinstatecourteither.88Citypolicedepartments,liketheLAPD,arealsotypicallyofflimits.TheCourthasruledthatacity police department cannot be sued for damages unless a specific city policy or custom can beidentified authorizing the illegal practice.89 Most cities, of course, do not have policies specificallyauthorizing illegal conduct (particularly race discrimination), and “custom” is notoriously difficult toprove.Accordingly,suingacitypolicedepartmentfordamagesisgenerallynotanoption.Yetevenifallof those hurdles can somehow be overcome, there is still the matter of proving a claim of racediscrimination.Aswehaveseen,toestablishanequal-protectionviolation,onemustproveintentionaldiscrimination—consciousracialbias.Lawenforcementofficialsrarelyadmittohavingactedforracialreasons, leavingmost victims of discriminatory law enforcementwithout anyone to sue andwithout aclaim that can be proven in a court of law. But even if a plaintiff managed to overcome all of theproceduralhurdlesandprovethatapoliceofficerdeliberatelyexercisedhisorherdiscretiononthebasisofrace,thatstillmightnotbeenough.

RaceasaFactor

The dirty little secret of policing is that the SupremeCourt has actually granted the police license todiscriminate.Thisfactisnotadvertisedbypolicedepartments,becauselawenforcementofficialsknowthatthepublicwouldnotrespondwelltothisfactintheeraofcolorblindness.Itisthesortofthingthatisbetter left unsaid. Civil rights lawyers—including those litigating racial profiling cases—have beencomplicitinthissilence,fearingthatanyacknowledgmentthatrace-basedpolicingisauthorizedbylawwouldlegitimateinthepublicmindtheverypracticetheyarehopingtoeradicate.Thetruth,however,isthis:Atotherstagesofthecriminaljusticeprocess,theCourthasindicatedthat

overtracialbiasnecessarilytriggersstrictscrutiny—aconcessionthathasnotbeencostly,asveryfewlaw enforcement officials today are foolish enough to admit bias openly. But the Supreme Court hasindicatedthatinpolicing,racecanbeusedasafactorindiscretionarydecisionmaking.InUnitedStatesv. Brignoni-Ponce, the Court concluded it was permissible under the equal protection clause of theFourteenthAmendmentforthepolicetouseraceasafactorinmakingdecisionsaboutwhichmotoriststostop and search. In that case, the Court concluded that the police could take a person’s Mexicanappearanceintoaccountwhendevelopingreasonablesuspicionthatavehiclemaycontainundocumentedimmigrants.TheCourt said that“the likelihood thatanypersonofMexicanancestry isanalien ishighenoughtomakeMexicanappearancearelevantfactor.”90SomecommentatorshavearguedthatBrignoni-Poncemaybelimitedtotheimmigrationcontext;theCourtmightnotapplythesameprincipletodrug-lawenforcement.Itisnotobviouswhattherationalbasiswouldbeforlimitingovertracediscriminationbypolice to immigration. The likelihood that a person of Mexican ancestry is an “alien” could not besignificantlyhigherthanthelikelihoodthatanyrandomblackpersonisadrugcriminal.The Court’s quiet blessing of race-based traffic stops has led to something of anOrwellian public

discourseregardingracialprofiling.Policedepartmentsandhighwaypatrolagenciesfrequentlydeclare,“Wedo not engage in racial profiling,” even though their officers routinely use race as a factorwhenmakingdecisionsregardingwhomtostopandsearch.Thejustificationfortheimplicitdoublespeak—“wedo not racial-profile; we just stop people based on race”—can be explained in part by the SupremeCourt’sjurisprudence.BecausetheSupremeCourthasauthorizedthepolicetouseraceasafactorwhenmaking decisions regardingwhom to stop and search, police departments believe that racial profilingexistsonlywhenraceisthesolefactor.Thus,ifraceisonefactorbutnottheonlyfactor,thenitdoesn’treallycountasafactoratall.Theabsurdityofthislogicisevidencedbythefactthatpolicealmostneverstopanyonesolelybecause

of race.Ayoungblackmalewearingbaggypants, standing in frontofhishighschoolsurroundedbyagroupofsimilarlydressedblackfriends,maybestoppedandsearchedbecausepolicebelievehe“lookslike” a drug dealer. Clearly, race is not the only reason for that conclusion. Gender, age, attire, andlocationplay a role.Thepolicewould likely ignore an eighty-five-year-oldblackman standing in thesamespotsurroundedbyagroupofelderlyblackwomen.The problem is that although race is rarely the sole reason for a stop or search, it is frequently a

determinativereason.Ayoungwhitemalewearingbaggypants,standinginfrontofhishighschoolandsurroundedbyhisfriends,mightwellbeignoredbypoliceofficers.Itmightneveroccurtothemthatagroupofyoungwhitekidsmightbedealingdopeinfrontoftheirhighschool.Similarlysituatedpeopleinevitablyaretreateddifferentlywhenpolicearegrantedpermissiontorelyonracialstereotypeswhenmakingdiscretionarydecisions.Equallyimportant,though,thesole-factortestignoresthewaysinwhichseeminglyrace-neutralfactors

—such as location—operate in a highly discriminatory fashion. Some law enforcement officials claimthattheywouldstopandsearchwhitekidswearingbaggyjeansintheghetto(thatwouldbesuspicious)—

itjustsohappensthey’rerarelythere.Subjectingpeopletostopsandsearchesbecausetheylivein“highcrime” ghettos cannot be said to be truly race-neutral, given that the ghetto itself was constructed tocontain and control groups of people defined by race.91 Even seemingly race-neutral factors such as“priorcriminalhistory”arenottrulyrace-neutral.Ablackkidarrestedtwiceforpossessionofmarijuanamaybenomoreofarepeatoffenderthanawhitefratboywhoregularlysmokespotinhisdormroom.Butbecause of his race and his confinement to a racially segregated ghetto, the black kid has a criminalrecord, while the white frat boy, because of his race and relative privilege, does not. Thus, whenprosecutorsthrowthebookatblackrepeatoffendersorwhenpolicestalkex-offendersandsubjectthemtoregular frisksandsearcheson thegrounds that itmakessense to“watchcriminalsclosely,” theyareoften exacerbating racial disparities created by the discretionary decision to wage theWar on Drugsalmostexclusivelyinpoorcommunitiesofcolor.Defendingagainstclaimsofracialbiasinpolicingiseasy.Becauseraceisnevertheonlyreasonfora

stop or search, any police officerwith a fifth-grade educationwill be able to citemultiple nonracialreasonsforinitiatinganencounter,includinganynumberoftheso-called“indicators”ofdrugtraffickingdiscussedinchapter2,suchasappearingtoonervousortoocalm.Policeofficers(likeprosecutors)arehighlyadeptatofferingrace-neutralreasonsforactionsthatconsistentlydisadvantageAfricanAmericans.Whereasprosecutorsclaimtheystrikeblackjurorsnotbecauseoftheirracebutbecauseoftheirhairstyle,policeofficershavetheirownstockexcuses—e.g.,“Yourhonor,wedidn’tstophimbecausehe’sblack;westoppedhimbecausehefailedtousehisturnsignalattherighttime,”or“Itwasn’tjustbecausehewas black; it was also because he seemed nervous when he saw the police car.” Judges are just asreluctant to second-guess an officer’s motives as they are to second-guess prosecutors’. So long asofficersrefrainfromutteringracialepithetsandsolongastheyshowthegoodsensenottosay“theonlyreason I stopped him was ’cause he’s black,” courts generally turn a blind eye to patterns ofdiscriminationbythepolice.Studiesofracialprofilinghaveshownthatpolicedo,infact,exercisetheirdiscretionregardingwhom

tostopandsearchinthedrugwarinahighlydiscriminatorymanner.92Notonlydopolicediscriminateintheir determinations regarding where to wage the war, but they also discriminate in their judgmentsregardingwhomtotargetoutsideoftheghetto’sinvisiblewalls.The most famous of these studies were conducted in New Jersey and Maryland in the 1990s.

Allegations of racial profiling in federally funded drug interdiction operations resulted in numerousinvestigationsandcomprehensivedatademonstratingadramaticpatternofracialbiasinhighwaypatrolstops and searches. These drug interdiction programs were the brain-child of the DEA, part of thefederallyfundedprogramknownasOperationPipeline.InNewJersey,thedatashowedthatonly15percentofalldriversontheNewJerseyTurnpikewere

racialminorities, yet 42 percent of all stops and 73 percent of all arrests were of blackmotorists—despitethefactthatblacksandwhitesviolatedtrafficlawsatalmostexactlythesamerate.Whileradarstopswere relativelyconsistentwith thepercentageofminorityviolators,discretionary stopsmadebyofficersinvolvedindruginterdictionresultedindoublethenumberofstopsofminorities.93AsubsequentstudyconductedbytheattorneygeneralofNewJerseyfoundthatsearchesontheturnpikewereevenmorediscriminatory than the initial stops—77 percent of all consent searches were of minorities. TheMaryland studies produced similar results: African Americans comprised only 17 percent of driversalonga stretchof I-95outsideofBaltimore,yet theywere70percentof thosewhowere stoppedandsearched.Only21percentof all drivers along that stretchofhighwaywere racialminorities (Latinos,Asians,andAfricanAmericans),yetthosegroupscomprisednearly80percentofthosepulledoverandsearched.94Whatmost surprisedmany analystswas that, in both studies,whiteswere actuallymore likely than

peopleofcolortobecarryingillegaldrugsorcontrabandintheirvehicles.Infact,inNewJersey,whiteswerealmosttwiceaslikelytobefoundwithillegaldrugsorcontrabandasAfricanAmericans,andfivetimesaslikelytobefoundwithcontrabandasLatinos.95Althoughwhitesweremorelikelytobeguiltyofcarryingdrugs, theywere far less likely to beviewed as suspicious, resulting in relatively few stops,searches, and arrests ofwhites. The formerNew Jersey attorney general dubbed this phenomenon the“circular illogicof racialprofiling.”Lawenforcementofficials, he explained,oftenpoint to the racialcompositionofourprisons and jails as a justification for targeting racialminorities, but the empiricalevidenceactuallysuggestedtheoppositeconclusionwaswarranted.Thedisproportionateimprisonmentofpeopleofcolorwas,inpart,aproductofracialprofiling—notajustificationforit.In the years following the release of theNew Jersey andMarylanddata, dozens of other studies of

racialprofilinghavebeenconducted.Abriefsampling:•InVolusiaCounty,Florida,areporterobtained148hoursofvideofootagedocumentingmore

than1,000highwaystopsconductedbystatetroopers.Only5percentofthedriversontheroadwereAfricanAmerican or Latino, butmore than 80 percent of the people stopped and searchedwereminorities.96

•InIllinois,thestatepoliceinitiatedadruginterdictionprogramknownasOperationValkyriethattargetedLatinomotorists.WhileLatinoscomprisedlessthan8percentoftheIllinoispopulationandtookfewerthan3percentofthepersonalvehicletripsinIllinois,theycomprisedapproximately30percentofthemotoristsstoppedbydruginterdictionofficersfordiscretionaryoffenses,suchasfailuretosignalalanechange.97Latinos,however,weresignificantlylesslikelythanwhitestohaveillegalcontrabandintheirvehicles.

•AracialprofilingstudyinOakland,California,in2001showedthatAfricanAmericanswereapproximatelytwiceaslikelyaswhitestobestopped,andthreetimesaslikelytobesearched.98

Pedestrian stops, too, have been the subject of study and controversy. The New York PoliceDepartmentreleasedstatisticsinFebruary2007showingthatduringtheprioryearitsofficersstoppedanastounding508,540people—anaverageof1,393perday—whowerewalkingdownthestreet,perhapsontheirwaytothesubway,grocerystore,orbusstop.Oftenthestopsincludedsearchesforillegaldrugsor guns—searches that frequently required people to lie face down on the pavement or stand spread-eagledagainstawallwhilepoliceofficersaggressivelygropedallover theirbodieswhilebystanderswatchedorwalkedby.Thevastmajorityofthosestoppedandsearchedwereracialminorities,andmorethanhalfwereAfricanAmerican.99TheNYPD began collecting data on pedestrian stops following the shooting ofAmadouDiallo, an

African immigrantwhodied inahailofpolicebulletson the front stepsofhisownhome inFebruary1999.Diallowasfollowedtohisapartmentbuildingbyfourwhitepoliceofficers—membersoftheeliteStreetCrimeUnit—whoviewedhimassuspiciousandwantedtointerrogatehim.Theyorderedhimtostop,but,according to theofficers,Diallodidnot respond immediately.Hewalkedabit further tohisapartmentbuilding,opened thedoor,and retrievedhiswallet—probably toproduce identification.Theofficerssaidtheythoughtthewalletwasagun,andfiredforty-onetimes.AmadouDiallodiedattheageoftwenty-two.Hewasunarmedandhadnocriminalrecord.Diallo’smurder sparkedhugeprotests, resulting ina seriesof studiescommissionedby theattorney

general of New York. The first study found that African Americans were stopped six times morefrequentlythanwhites,andthatstopsofAfricanAmericanswerelesslikelytoresultinarreststhanstopsofwhites—presumablybecauseblackswere less likely tobe foundwithdrugsorothercontraband.100AlthoughtheNYPDattemptedtojustifythestopsonthegroundsthattheyweredesignedtogetgunsoffthestreet,stopsbytheStreetCrimeUnit—thegroupofofficerswhosupposedlyarespeciallytrainedtoidentifygun-totingthugs—yieldedaweaponinonly2.5percentofallstops.101

Ratherthanreducingrelianceonstop-and-frisktacticsfollowingtheDialloshootingandthereleaseofthisdisturbingdata, theNYPDdramatically increased its numberofpedestrian stops andcontinued tostopandfriskAfricanAmericansatgrosslydisproportionaterates.TheNYPDstoppedfivetimesmorepeoplein2005thanin2002—theoverwhelmingmajorityofwhomwereAfricanAmericanorLatino.102In LosAngeles,mass stops of youngAfricanAmericanmen and boys resulted in the creation of a

database containing the names, addresses, and other biographical information of the overwhelmingmajorityofyoungblackmenintheentirecity.TheLAPDjustifieditsdatabaseasatoolfortrackinggangor“gang-related”activity.However,thecriterionforinclusioninthedatabaseisnotoriouslyvagueanddiscriminatory.HavingarelativeorfriendinagangandwearingbaggyjeansisenoughtoputyouthonwhattheACLUcallsaBlackList.InDenver,displayinganytwoofalistofattributes—includingslang,“clothingofaparticularcolor,”pagers,hairstyles,orjewelry—earnsyouthaspotintheDenverPolice’sgangdatabase.In1992,citizenactivismledtoaninvestigation,whichrevealedthateightoutofeverytenpeopleofcolorintheentirecitywereonthelistofsuspectedcriminals.103

TheEndofanEra

Thelitigationthatsweptthenationinthe1990schallengingracialprofilingpracticeshasnearlyvanished.Thenewsstoriesaboutpeoplebeingstoppedandsearchedontheirwaytochurchorworkorschoolhavefadedfromtheeveningnews.Thisisnotbecausetheproblemhasbeensolvedorbecausetheexperienceofbeingofbeingstopped, interrogated,andsearchedonthebasisofracehasbecomelesshumiliating,alienating,ordemoralizingastimehasgoneby.Thelawsuitshavedisappearedbecause,inalittlenoticedcase calledAlexander v. Sandoval, decided in 2001, theSupremeCourt eliminated the last remainingavenueavailableforchallengingracialbiasinthecriminaljusticesystem.104Sandoval was not, on its face, even about criminal justice. It was a case challenging theAlabama

DepartmentofPublicSafety’sdecisiontoadministerstatedriver’slicenseexaminationsonlyinEnglish.Theplaintiffsarguedthatthedepartment’spolicyviolatedTitleVIoftheCivilRightsActof1964anditsimplementing regulations, because the policy had the effect of subjecting non-English speakers todiscriminationbasedon their national origin.TheSupremeCourt didnot reach themerits of the case,rulinginsteadthattheplaintiffslackedthelegalrighteventofilethelawsuit.ItconcludedthatTitleVIdoes not provide a “private right of action” to ordinary citizens and civil rights groups;meaning thatvictimsofdiscriminationcannolongersueunderthelaw.TheSandoval decision virtually wiped out racial profiling litigation nationwide. Nearly all of the

cases alleging racial profiling in drug-law enforcementwere brought pursuant toTitleVI of theCivilRights Act of 1964 and its implementing regulations. Title VI prohibits federally funded programs oractivitiesfromdiscriminatingonthebasisofrace,andtheregulationsemploya“disparateimpacttest”fordiscrimination—meaningthatplaintiffscouldprevailinclaimsofracediscriminationwithoutprovingdiscriminatory intent.Under the regulations, a federally funded lawenforcementprogramor activity isunlawful if it has a racially discriminatory impact and if that impact cannot be justified by lawenforcementnecessity.Becausenearlyall lawenforcementagenciesreceivefederalfundinginthedrugwar, and because drug war tactics—such as pretext stops and consent searches—have a grosslydiscriminatory impact and are largely ineffective, plaintiffs were able to argue persuasively that thetacticscouldnotbejustifiedbylawenforcementnecessity.In 1999, for example, the ACLU of Northern California filed a class action lawsuit against the

CaliforniaHighwayPatrol(CHP),allegingthatitshighwaydruginterdictionprogramviolatedTitleVIoftheCivilRightsActbecauseitreliedheavilyondiscretionarypretextstopsandconsentsearchesthatareemployed overwhelmingly against African American and Latino motorists. During the course of thelitigation,theCHPproduceddatathatshowedAfricanAmericansweretwiceaslikely,andLatinosthreetimesaslikely,tobestoppedandsearchedbyitsofficersaswerewhites.Thedatafurthershowedthatconsent searcheswere ineffective;onlya tinypercentageof thediscriminatorysearches resulted in thediscoveryofdrugsorothercontraband,yet thousandsofblackandbrownmotoristswere subjected tobaselessinterrogations,searches,andseizuresasaresultofhavingcommittedaminortrafficviolation.TheCHPenteredintoaconsentdecreethatprovidedforathree-yearmoratoriumonconsentsearchesandpretext stopsstatewideand thecollectionofcomprehensivedataon the raceandethnicityofmotoristsstopped and searched by the police, so that itwould be possible to determinewhether discriminatorypracticeswerecontinuing.SimilarresultswereobtainedinNewJersey,asaresultoflandmarklitigationfiledagainst theNewJerseyStatePolice.AfterSandoval, thesecasescanno longerbebroughtunderTitleVIbyprivatelitigants.OnlythefederalgovernmentcansuetoenforceTitleVI’santidiscriminationprovisions—somethingithasneithertheinclinationnorthecapacitytodoinmostracialprofilingcasesdue to its limited resources and institutional reluctance to antagonize local lawenforcement.Since theWaronDrugs,privatelitigantsrepresentedbyorganizationssuchastheACLUhavebeenattheforefront

ofracialprofilinglitigation.Thosedays,however,havecometoanend.Theracialprofilingcasesthatswept the nation in the 1990s may well be the last wave of litigation challenging racial bias in thecriminaljusticesystemthatweseeforaverylongtime.TheSupremeCourthasnowclosedthecourthousedoorstoclaimsofracialbiasateverystageofthe

criminaljusticeprocess,fromstopsandsearchestopleabargainingandsentencing.Thesystemofmassincarceration is now, for all practical purposes, thoroughly immunized from claims of racial bias.Staggering racial disparities in the drug war continue but rarely make the news. The Obamaadministrationhasindicateditsupportsabolitionofthehundred-to-onedisparityinsentencingforcrackversus powder cocaine—the most obvious and embarrassing example of racial bias in a system thatpurportstobecolorblind.Butthatdisparityisjustthetipoftheiceberg.Asnotedinchapter2,thissystemdependsprimarily on the prison label, not prison time.Whatmattersmost iswhogets swept into thissystem of control and then ushered into an undercaste. The legal rules adopted by the SupremeCourtguaranteethatthosewhofindthemselveslockedupandpermanentlylockedoutduetothedrugwarareoverwhelminglyblackandbrown.

4

TheCruelHand

Aheavyandcruelhandhasbeenlaiduponus.Asapeople,wefeelourselvestobenotonlydeeplyinjured,butgrosslymisunderstood.Ourwhitecountrymendonotknowus.Theyarestrangerstoourcharacter,ignorantofourcapacity,oblivioustoourhistoryandprogress,andaremisinformedastotheprinciplesandideasthatcontrolandguideus,asapeople.ThegreatmassofAmericancitizensestimatesusasbeingacharacterlessandpurposelesspeople;andhenceweholdupourheads,ifatall,againstthewitheringinfluenceofanation’sscornandcontempt.1

—FrederickDouglass,inastatementonbehalfofdelegatestotheNationalColoredConventionheldinRochester,NewYork,inJuly1853

When Frederick Douglass and the other delegates to the National Colored Convention converged inRochester,NewYork,inthesummerof1853todiscussthecondition,status,andfutureof“coloreds”(astheywerecalledthen), theydecriedthestigmaofrace—thecondemnationandscornheapeduponthemfor no reason other than the color of their skin.Most of the delegates were freed slaves, though theyounger ones may have been born free. Northern emancipation was complete, but freedom remainedelusive.Blackswerefinallyfreefromtheformalcontroloftheirowners,buttheywerenotfullcitizens—they could not vote, theywere subject to legal discrimination, and at anymoment, Southern plantationownerscouldcapturethemonthestreetandwhiskthembacktoslavery.AlthoughNorthernslaveryhadbeen abolished, every black person was still presumed a slave—by law—and could not testify orintroduceevidenceincourt.ThusifaSouthernplantationownersaidyouwereaslave,youwere—unlessawhite person interceded in a court of lawon your behalf and testified that youwere rightfully free.Slaverymayhavedied,butforthousandsofblacks,thebadgeofslaverylivedon.Todayacriminal freedfromprisonhasscarcelymorerights,andarguably less respect, thana freed

slaveorablackpersonliving“free”inMississippiattheheightofJimCrow.Thosereleasedfromprisononparolecanbestoppedandsearchedbythepoliceforanyreason—ornoreasonatall—andreturnedtoprisonfor themostminorof infractions,suchasfailing toattendameetingwithaparoleofficer.Evenwhen released from the system’s formal control, the stigma of criminality lingers. Police supervision,monitoring,andharassmentarefactsoflifenotonlyforallthoselabeledcriminals,butforallthosewho“looklike”criminals.Lynchmobsmaybelonggone,butthethreatofpoliceviolenceiseverpresent.Awrongmoveorsuddengesturecouldmeanmassiveretaliationbythepolice.Awalletcouldbemistakenfor a gun. The “whites only” signs may gone, but new signs have gone up—notices placed in jobapplications, rental agreements, loan applications, forms forwelfarebenefits, school applications, andpetitionsforlicenses,informingthegeneralpublicthat“felons”arenotwantedhere.Acriminalrecordtoday authorizes precisely the forms of discrimination we supposedly left behind—discrimination inemployment,housing,education,publicbenefits,andjuryservice.Thoselabeledcriminalscanevenbedeniedtherighttovote.Criminals,itturnsout,aretheonesocialgroupinAmericawehavepermissiontohate.In“colorblind”

America,criminalsarethenewwhippingboys.Theyareentitledtonorespectandlittlemoralconcern.Likethe“coloreds”intheyearsfollowingemancipation,criminalstodayaredeemedacharacterlessandpurposelesspeople,deservingofourcollectivescornandcontempt.Whenwesaysomeonewas“treatedlikeacriminal,”whatwemeantosayisthatheorshewastreatedaslessthanhuman,likeashamefulcreature.Hundredsofyearsago,ournationput thoseconsidered less thanhumaninshackles; less thanonehundredyearsago,werelegated themto theothersideof town; todayweput themincages.Oncereleased,theyfindthataheavyandcruelhandhasbeenlaiduponthem.

BraveNewWorld

Onemightimaginethatacriminaldefendant,whenbroughtbeforethejudge—orwhenmeetingwithhisattorneyforthefirsttime—wouldbetoldoftheconsequencesofaguiltypleaorconviction.Hewouldbetold that, if he pleads guilty to a felony, hewill be deemed “unfit” for jury service and automaticallyexcludedfromjuriesfortherestofhislife.2Hewouldalsobetoldthathecouldbedeniedtherighttovote.Inacountrythatpreachesthevirtuesofdemocracy,onecouldreasonablyassumethatbeingstrippedofbasicpoliticalrightswouldbetreatedbyjudgesandcourtpersonnelasaseriousmatterindeed.Notso.Whenadefendantpleadsguilty toaminordrugoffense,nobodywill likely tellhimthathemaybepermanently forfeiting his right to vote as well as his right to serve on a jury—two of the mostfundamentalrightsinanymoderndemocracy.Hewillalsobetoldlittleornothingabouttheparalleluniverseheisabouttoenter,onethatpromisesa

formofpunishment that isoftenmoredifficult tobear thanprison time:a lifetimeof shame,contempt,scorn, and exclusion. In this hidden world, discrimination is perfectly legal. As Jeremy Travis hasobserved,“Inthisbravenewworld,punishmentfortheoriginaloffenseisnolongerenough;one’sdebttosocietyisneverpaid.”3Othercommentatorslikentheprisonlabelto“themarkofCain”andcharacterizetheperpetualnatureof thesanctionas“internalexile.”4Myriad laws, rules,and regulationsoperate todiscriminateagainstex-offendersandeffectivelyprevent their reintegration into themainstreamsocietyandeconomy.Theserestrictionsamounttoaformof“civicdeath”andsendtheunequivocalmessagethat“they”arenolongerpartof“us.”Oncelabeledafelon,thebadgeofinferiorityremainswithyoufortherestofyourlife,relegatingyou

toapermanentsecond-classstatus.Consider, forexample, theharshreality facinga first-timeoffenderwhopleadsguiltytofelonypossessionofmarijuana.Evenifthedefendantmanagestoavoidprisontimeby accepting a “generous” plea deal, hemay discover that the punishment that awaits him outside thecourthousedoors is farmoresevereanddebilitating thanwhathemighthaveencountered inprison.AtaskforceoftheAmericanBarAssociationdescribedthebleakrealityfacingapettydrugoffenderthisway:

[The] offender may be sentenced to a term of probation, community service, and court costs.Unbeknownsttothisoffender,andperhapsanyotheractorinthesentencingprocess,asaresultofhisconvictionhemaybeineligibleformanyfederally-fundedhealthandwelfarebenefits,foodstamps,public housing, and federal educational assistance. His driver’s license may be automaticallysuspended,andhemaynolongerqualifyforcertainemploymentandprofessionallicenses.Ifheisconvictedofanothercrimehemaybesubjecttoimprisonmentasarepeatoffender.Hewillnotbepermittedtoenlist inthemilitary,orpossessafirearm,orobtainafederalsecurityclearance.Ifacitizen,hemaylosetherighttovote;ifnot,hebecomesimmediatelydeportable.5

Despitethebrutal,debilitatingimpactofthese“collateralconsequences”onex-offenders’lives,courtshavegenerallydeclinedtofindthatsuchsanctionsareactually“punishment”forconstitutionalpurposes.Asa result, judgesarenot required to informcriminaldefendantsofsomeof themost important rightstheyareforfeitingwhentheypleadguiltytoafelony.Infact,judges,prosecutors,anddefenseattorneysmaynotevenbeawareofthefullrangeofcollateralconsequencesforafelonyconviction.Yetthesecivilpenalties, althoughnot consideredpunishmentbyour courts, oftenmake it virtually impossible for ex-offenders to integrate into themainstreamsocietyandeconomyuponrelease.Farfromcollateral, thesesanctions can be the most damaging and painful aspect of a criminal conviction. Collectively, thesesanctionssendthestrongmessagethat,nowthatyouhavebeenlabeled,youarenolongerwanted.Youareno longerpart of “us,” thedeserving.Unable todrive, get a job, findhousing, or evenqualify for

public benefits, many ex-offenders lose their children, their dignity, and eventually their freedom—landingbackinjailafterfailingtoplaybyrulesthatseemhopelesslystackedagainstthem.ThechurningofAfricanAmericans inandoutofprisons today ishardlysurprising,given thestrong

message that is sent to them that they are not wanted in mainstream society. In Frederick Douglass’swords,“Menaresoconstitutedthattheyderivetheirconvictionoftheirownpossibilitieslargelyfromtheestimateformedofthembyothers.Ifnothingisexpectedofapeople,thatpeoplewillfinditdifficulttocontradict thatexpectation.”6More thanahundredyears later, a similar argumentwasmadebyanex-offendercontemplatinghereventualreleaseintoasocietythathadconstructedabrand-newlegalregimedesignedtokeepherlockedout,fiftyyearsafterthedemiseofJimCrow.“RightnowI’minprison,”shesaid. “Like society kickedme out. They’re like, ‘Okay, the criminal element,We don’t want them insociety,we’regoingtoputtheminprisons.’Okay,butonceIgetout,thenwhatdoyoudo?Whatdoyoudowithallthesemillionsofpeoplethathavebeeninprisonandbeenreleased?Imean,doyouacceptthemback?Ordoyoukeepthemasoutcasts?Andifyoukeepthemasoutcasts,howdoyouexpectthemtoact?”7Remarkably, theoverwhelmingmajorityofex-offenders strugglemightily toplayby the rulesand to

succeed in a society seemingly hell-bent on excluding them. Like their forbears, they do their best tosurvive,eventhrive—againstallodds.

NoPlaceLikeHome

Thefirstquestiononthemindsofmanyreleasedprisonersastheytaketheirfirststepsoutsidetheprisongatesiswheretheywillsleepthatnight.Someprisonershavefamilieseagerlyawaitingthem—familieswhoarewillingtolet theirnewlyreleasedrelativesleeponthecouch,floor,orextrabedindefinitely.Most,however,desperatelyneedtofindaplacetolive—ifnotimmediately,atleastsoon.Afterseveraldays,weeks,ormonthsofsleepinginyouraunt’sbasementoronafriend’scouch,atimecomeswhenyouareexpectedtofendforyourself.Figuringouthow,exactly,todothatisnoeasytask,however,whenyourfelonyrecordoperates tobaryoufromanypublichousingassistance.Asoneyoungmanwitha felonyconvictionexplainedinexasperation,“IaskedforanapplicationforSection8.TheyaskedmeifIhadafelony.Isaid,‘yes.’...Theysaid,‘Well,then,thisapplicationisn’tforyou.’”8Thisyoungmanhadjusthithisfirstbrickwallcomingoutofprison.Anyoneconvictedofafelony—

anyfelony—isautomaticallyineligibleforpublichousingassistanceforatleastfiveyears.Evenafterthefive-yearperiodhas expired, those labeled“criminals” facea lifetimeofdiscrimination inpublic andprivatehousingmarkets.Housingdiscriminationagainstformerfelons(aswellassuspected“criminals”)isperfectlylegal.DuringJimCrow,itwaslegaltodenyhousingonthebasisofrace,throughrestrictivecovenantsandotherexclusionarypractices.Today,discriminationagainstfelons,criminalsuspects,andtheir families is routine among public and private landlords alike. Rather than racially restrictivecovenants,wehaverestrictiveleaseagreements,barringthenew“undesirables.”TheAntiDrugAbuseActof1988,passedbyCongressaspartof theWaronDrugs,calledforstrict

leaseenforcementandevictionofpublichousingtenantswhoengageincriminalactivity.TheActgrantedpublic housing agencies the authority to use leases to evict any tenant, household member, or guestengaged in any criminal activityonornearpublichousingpremises. In1996,PresidentClinton, in anefforttobolsterhis“toughoncrime”credentials,declaredthatpublichousingagenciesshouldexercisenodiscretionwhenatenantorguestengagesincriminalactivity,particularlyifitisdrug-related.Inhis1996 State of the Union address, he proposed “One Strike and You’re Out” legislation, whichstrengthenedevictionrulesandstronglyurgedthatdrugoffendersbeautomaticallyexcludedfrompublichousingbasedontheircriminalrecords.Helaterdeclared,“Ifyoubreakthelaw,younolongerhaveahomeinpublichousing,onestrikeandyou’reout.ThatshouldbethelaweverywhereinAmerica.”9Initsfinal form, the act, together with the Quality Housing andWork Responsibility Act of 1998, not onlyauthorizedpublichousingagenciestoexcludeautomatically(andevict)drugoffendersandotherfelons;italsoallowedagenciestobarapplicantsbelievedtobeusingillegaldrugsorabusingalcohol—whetherornot they had been convicted of a crime. These decisions can be appealed, but appeals are rarelysuccessfulwithoutanattorney—aluxurymostpublichousingapplicantscannotafford.In response to the new legislation and prodding by President Clinton, the Housing and Urban

DevelopmentDepartment (HUD)developedguidelines topresspublichousingagencies to “evictdrugdealersandothercriminals”and“screentenantsforcriminalrecords.”10HUD’s“OneStrikeGuide”callson housing agencies to “take full advantage of their authority to use stringent screening and evictionprocedures.”Italsoencourageshousingauthoritiesnotonlytoscreenallapplicants’criminalrecords,butto develop their own exclusion criteria. The guide notes that agency ratings and funding are tied towhethertheyare“adoptingandimplementingeffectiveapplicantscreening,”aclearsignalthatagenciesmaybepenalizedfornotcleaninghouse.11Throughout theUnited States, public housing agencies have adopted exclusionary policies that deny

eligibilitytoapplicantsevenwiththemostminorcriminalbackgrounds.ThecrackdowninspiredbytheWaronDrugshasresultedinunprecedentedpunitiveness,denyingpoorpeopleaccesstopublichousingforvirtuallyanycrime.“Justaboutanyoffensewilldo,evenifitbearsscantrelationtothelikelihoodthe

applicantwillbeagoodtenant.”12Theconsequencesforrealfamiliescanbedevastating.Withouthousing,peoplecanlosetheirchildren.

Take for example, the forty-two-year-old African American man who applied for public housing forhimself and his three childrenwhowere livingwith him at the time.13 Hewas denied because of anearlierdrugpossessionchargeforwhichhehadpleadedguiltyandservedthirtydaysinjail.Ofcourse,the odds that hewould have been convicted of drug possessionwould have been extremely low if hewerewhite.ButasanAfricanAmerican,hewasnotonlytargetedbythedrugwarbutthendeniedaccesstohousingbecauseofhisconviction.Sincebeingdeniedhousing,hehaslostcustodyofhischildrenandis homeless.Many nights he sleeps outside on the streets. Stiff punishment, indeed, for a minor drugoffense—especiallyforhischildren,whoareinnocentofanycrime.Remarkably,undercurrentlaw,anactualconvictionorfindingofaformalviolationisnotnecessaryto

trigger exclusion. Public housing officials are free to reject applicants simply on the basis of arrests,regardless ofwhether they result in convictions or fines. BecauseAfricanAmericans and Latinos aretargeted by police in the War on Drugs, it is far more likely that they will be arrested for minor,nonviolentcrimes.Accordingly,HUDpoliciesexcludingpeoplefromhousingassistancebasedonarrestsaswellasconvictionsguaranteehighlydiscriminatoryresults.PerhapsnoaspectoftheHUDregulatoryregimehasbeenascontroversial,however,asthe“no-fault”

clausecontainedineverypublichousinglease.Publichousingtenantsarerequiredtodofarmorethansimplypaytheirrentontime,keepthenoisedown,andmakesuretheirhomesarekeptingoodcondition.The“OneStrikeandYou’reOut”policyrequireseverypublichousingleasetostipulatethatifthetenant,oranymemberofthetenant’shousehold,oranyguestofthetenant,engagesinanydrug-relatedorothercriminal activity on or off the premises, the tenancywill be terminated. Prior to the adoption of thispolicy, it was generally understood that a tenant could not be evicted unless he or she had someknowledge of or participation in alleged criminal activity.Accordingly, inRucker v.Davis, theNinthCircuitCourtofAppeals struckdown the“no-fault”clause,on theground that theevictionof innocenttenants—whowerenotaccusedorevenawareoftheallegedcriminalactivity—wasinconsistentwiththelegislativescheme.14TheU.S.SupremeCourtreversed.15TheCourt ruled in2002 that,under federal law,publichousing

tenantscanbeevictedregardlessofwhether theyhadknowledgeoforparticipated inallegedcriminalactivity. According to the Court, William Lee and Barbara Hill were rightfully evicted after theirgrandsonswerechargedwithsmokingmarijuanainaparkinglotnear theirapartments.HermanWalkerwasproperlyevictedaswell,afterpolicefoundcocaineonhiscaregiver.AndPerlieRuckerwasrightlyevictedfollowingthearrestofherdaughterforpossessionofcocaineafewblocksfromhome.TheCourtruled these tenants could be held civilly liable for the nonviolent behavior of their children andcaregivers.Theycouldbetossedoutofpublichousingduetonofaultoftheirown.Intheabstract,policiesbarringorevictingpeoplewhoaresomehowassociatedwithcriminalactivity

mayseemlikeareasonableapproach todealingwithcrimeinpublichousing,particularlywhencrimehas gotten out of control. Desperate times call for desperatemeasures, it is often said. The problem,however, is twofold: These vulnerable families have nowhere to go, and the impact is inevitablydiscriminatory.Peoplewhoarenotpoorandwhoarenotdependentuponpublicassistanceforhousingneednotfearthat,iftheirson,daughter,caregiver,orrelativeiscaughtwithsomemarijuanaatschoolorshopliftsfromadrugstore,theywillfindthemselvessuddenlyevicted—homeless.Butforcountlesspoorpeople—particularlyracialminoritieswhodisproportionatelyrelyonpublicassistance—thatpossibilityloomslarge.Asaresult,manyfamiliesarereluctanttoallowtheirrelatives—particularlythosewhoarerecentlyreleasedfromprison—tostaywiththem,eventemporarily.Nooneknowsexactlyhowmanypeopleareexcludedfrompublichousingbecauseofcriminalrecords,

oreventhenumberofpeoplewithcriminalrecordswhowouldbeineligibleiftheyapplied.Thereisnonational data available.We do know, however, that there are several million ex-felons in the UnitedStates and that under existing rules everyone convicted of a felony is automatically ineligible for aminimumoffiveyears.WealsoknowtherearetensofmillionsofAmericanswhohavebeenarrestedbutnever convicted of any offense, or convicted only ofminormisdemeanors, and they too are routinelyexcludedfrompublichousing.Whathappenstothesepeopledeniedhousingassistanceorevictedfromtheir homes? Where do they go? Thousands of them become homeless. A study conducted by theMcCormickInstituteofPublicAffairsfoundthatnearlyaquarterofguestsinhomelesssheltershadbeenincarceratedwithinthepreviousyear—peoplewhowereunabletofindsomewheretoliveafterreleasefromprisonwalls.Prisonersreturning“home”aretypicallythepoorestofthepoor,lackingtheabilitytopayforprivate

housingandroutinelydeniedpublichousingassistance—thetypeofassistancewhichcouldprovidesomemuch-neededstabilityintheir lives.Forthem,“goinghome”ismoreafigureofspeechthanarealisticoption.Morethanahalfmillionpeoplearereleasedfromprisoneachyear,andformany,findinganewhomeappearsnexttoimpossible,notjustintheshortterm,butfortherestoftheirlives.Asaforty-one-year-oldAfricanAmericanmother remarkedafterbeingdeniedhousingbecauseofa singlearrest fouryearspriortoherapplication,“I’mtryingtodotherightthing;Ideserveachance.EvenifIwastheworstcriminal,Ideserveachance.Everybodydeservesachance.”16

BoxedIn

Asidefromfiguringoutwheretosleep,nothingismoreworrisomeforpeopleleavingprisonthanfiguringoutwheretowork.Infact,astudybytheVeraInstitutefoundthatduringthefirstmonthafterreleasefromprison,peopleconsistentlyweremorepreoccupiedwithfindingworkthananythingelse.17Someof thepressuretofindworkcomesdirectlyfromthecriminaljusticesystem.Accordingtoonesurveyofstateparoleagencies,fortyofthefifty-onejurisdictionssurveyed(thefiftystatesandtheDistrictofColumbia)requiredparoleesto“maintaingainfulemployment.”18Failuretodosocouldmeanmoreprisontime.Even beyond the need to complywith the conditions of parole, employment satisfies amore basic

humanneed—thefundamentalneedtobeselfsufficient,tocontribute,tosupportone’sfamily,andtoaddvalue to society at large.Finding a job allows a person to establish a positive role in the community,developahealthyself-image,andkeepadistancefromnegativeinfluencesandopportunitiesforillegalbehavior.Workisdeemedsofundamentaltohumanexistenceinmanycountriesaroundtheworldthatitisregardedasabasichumanright.Deprivationofwork,particularlyamongmen,isstronglyassociatedwithdepressionandviolence.Landing a job after release from prison is no small feat. “I’ve watched the discrimination and

experienceditfirsthandwhenyouhavetocheckthebox,”saysSusanBurton,anex-offenderwhofoundeda business aimed at providing formerly incarcerated women the support necessary to reestablishthemselves in the workforce. The “box” she refers to is the question on job applications in whichapplicantsareaskedtocheck“yes”or“no”if theyhaveeverbeenconvictedofacrime.“It’snotonly[on] job [applications],”Burtonexplains.“It’sonhousing. It’sonaschoolapplication. It’sonwelfareapplications.It’severywhereyouturn.”19Nearlyeverystateallowsprivateemployerstodiscriminateonthebasisofpastcriminalconvictions.

Infact,employersinmoststatescandenyjobstopeoplewhowerearrestedbutneverconvictedofanycrime.Onlytenstatesprohibitallemployersandlicensingagenciesfromconsideringarrests,andthreestatesprohibitsomeemployersandoccupationalandlicensingagenciesfromdoingso.20Employersinagrowingnumber of professions are barred by state licensing agencies fromhiring peoplewith awiderangeofcriminalconvictions,evenconvictionsunrelatedtothejoborlicensesought.21Theresultofthesediscriminatorylawsisthatvirtuallyeveryjobapplication,whetherfordogcatcher,

busdriver,BurgerKingcashier,oraccountant,asksex-offendersto“checkthebox.”Mostex-offendershavedifficulty evengetting an interviewafter theyhave checked thebox,becausemost employers areunwilling to consider hiring a self-identified criminal.One survey showed that although 90 percent ofemployerssaytheyarewillingtoconsiderfillingtheirmostrecentjobvacancywithawelfarerecipient,only40percentarewillingtoconsiderdoingsowithanex-offender.22Similarly,a2002surveyof122Californiaemployersrevealedthatalthoughmostemployerswouldconsiderhiringsomeoneconvictedofamisdemeanoroffense, thenumbersdroppeddramatically for those convictedof felonies.Less than aquarter of employerswerewilling to consider hiring someone convicted of a drug-related felony; thenumber plummeted to 7 percent for a property-related felony, and less than 1 percent for a violentfelony.23Eventhosewhohopetobeself-employed—forexample,asabarber,manicurist,gardener,orcounselor—may discover that they are denied professional licenses on the grounds of past arrests orconvictions, even if their offenses have nothing at all to dowith their ability to performwell in theirchosenprofession.Formostpeoplecomingoutofprison,acriminalconvictionaddstotheiralreadyproblematicprofile.

About70percentofoffendersandex-offendersarehighschooldropouts,andaccordingtoat leastonestudy,abouthalfarefunctionallyilliterate.24Manyoffendersaretrackedforprisonatearlyages,labeled

ascriminals in their teenyears,andthenshuttledfromtheirdecrepit,underfundedinnercityschools tobrand-new,high-techprisons.Thecommunitiesandschoolsfromwhichtheycamefailedtopreparethemfortheworkforce,andoncetheyhavebeenlabeledcriminals,theirjobprospectsareforeverbleak.Adding to their troubles is the “spatial mismatch” between their residence and employment

opportunities.25Willingnesstohireex-offendersisgreatestinconstructionormanufacturing—industriesthat require little customer contact—andweakest in retail trade and other service sector businesses.26Manufacturingjobs,however,haveallbutdisappearedfromtheurbancoreduringthepastthirtyyears.Notlongago,young,unskilledmencouldfinddecent,well-payingjobsatlargefactoriesinmostmajorNortherncities.Today,duetoglobalizationanddeindustrialization,thatisnolongerthecase.Jobscanbefound in the suburbs—mostly service sector jobs—but employment for unskilled men with criminalconvictions,whiledifficulttofindanywhere,isespeciallyhardtofindclosetohome.Anex-offenderwhosedriver’slicensehasbeensuspendedorwhodoesnothaveaccesstoacar,often

facesnearlyinsurmountablebarrierstofindingemployment.Drivingtothesuburbstopickupanddropoffapplications,attendinterviews,andpursueemploymentleadsmaybeperfectlyfeasibleifyouhaveadriver’s license and access to a vehicle, but attempting to do so by bus is anothermatter entirely.AnunemployedblackmalefromChicago’sSouthSideexplains:“Mostof thetime... theplacesbetoofarandyouneedtransportationandIdon’thavenonerightnow.IfIhadsomeI’dprobablybeabletogetone[a job]. If Ihadacarandwentwayinto thesuburbs, ’cause thereain’tnonein thecity.”27Thosewhoactuallylandjobsinthesuburbsfinditdifficulttokeepthemwithoutreliable,affordabletransportation.Murray McNair, a twenty-two-year-old African American, returned to Newark, New Jersey, after

beinglockedupfordrugoffenses.Hesharesasmallapartmentwithhispregnantgirlfriend,hissister,andher two children. Through a federally funded job training program operated by Goodwill Industries,McNairfounda$9-an-hourjobatawarehousetwentymiles—twobusesandataxiride—away.“Iknowit’s going to be tough,” he told a New York Times reporter. “But I can’t be thinking about myselfanymore.”28TheoddsofMcNair,oranyex-offender inasimilarsituation,succeedingunder thesecircumstances

aresmall.Ifyoumake$9perhour,butspend$20dollarsormoregettingtoandfromworkeveryday,how do you manage to pay rent, buy food, and help to support yourself and a growing family? Anunemployedthirty-six-year-oldblackmanquithissuburbanjobbecauseofthetransportationproblem.“IwasspendingmoremoneygettingtoworkthanIearnedworking.”29

TheBlackBox

Blackex-offendersarethemostseverelydisadvantagedapplicants inthemodernjobmarket.Whilealljobapplicants—regardlessof race—areharmedbyacriminal record, theharmisnotequally felt.NotonlyareAfricanAmericansfarmorelikelytobelabeledcriminals,theyarealsomorestronglyaffectedby the stigmaofacriminal record.Blackmenconvictedof feloniesare the least likely to receive joboffersofanydemographicgroup,andsuburbanemployersarethemostunwillingtohirethem.30SociologistDevahPagerexplainsthatthosesenttoprison“areinstitutionallybrandedasaparticular

class of individuals” with major implications for their place and status in society.31 The “negativecredential” associated with a criminal record represents a unique mechanism of state-sponsoredstratification.AsPagerputsit,“itisthestatethatcertifiesparticularindividualsinwaysthatqualifythemfordiscriminationorsocialexclusion.”The“officialstatus”of thisnegativecredentialdifferentiates itfrom other sources of social stigma, offering legitimacy to its use as a basis for discrimination. Fourdecadesago,employerswerefree todiscriminateexplicitlyon thebasisof race; todayemployers feelfree todiscriminateagainst thosewhobear theprison label—i.e., those labeledcriminalsby thestate.The result is a system of stratification based on the “official certification of individual character andcompetence”—aformofbrandingbythegovernment.32Given the incredibly high level of discrimination suffered by black men in the job market and the

structural barriers to employment in the new economy, it should come as no surprise that a hugepercentageofAfricanAmericanmenareunemployed.Nearlyone-thirdofyoungblackmenintheUnitedStates today are out of work.33 The jobless rate for young black male dropouts, including thoseincarcerated,isastaggering65percent.34Inanefforttoaddresstherampantjoblessnessamongblackmenlabeledcriminals,agrowingnumber

of advocates in recent years have launched Ban the Box campaigns. These campaigns have beensuccessful in cities like San Francisco,whereAll ofUs orNone, a nonprofit grassroots organizationdedicated to eliminating discrimination against ex-offenders, persuaded the San Francisco Board ofSupervisors to approve a resolution designed to eliminate hiring discrimination against people withcriminal records. San Francisco’s new policy (which took effect in June 2006) seeks to preventdiscrimination on the basis of a criminal record by removing the criminal-history box from the initialapplication. An individual’s past convictions will still be considered, but not until later in the hiringprocess, when the applicant has been identified as a serious candidate for the position. The onlyexception is for those jobs for which state or local laws expressly bar people with certain specificconvictions from employment. These applicants will still be required to submit conviction-historyinformation at the beginning of the hiring process. However, unlike a similar ordinance adopted inBoston,SanFrancisco’spolicyappliesonlytopublicemployment,nottoprivatevendorsthatdobusinesswiththecityorcountyofSanFrancisco.While thesegrassroots initiativesandpolicyproposalsaremajorachievements, they raisequestions

abouthowbesttoaddressthecomplexandinterlockingformsofdiscriminationexperiencedbyblackex-offenders. Some scholars believe, based on the available data, that black males may suffer morediscrimination—not less—when specific criminal history information is not available.35 Because theassociationofraceandcriminalityissopervasive,employersmayuselessaccurateanddiscriminatorymethods to screen out those perceived to be likely criminals. Popular but misguided proxies forcriminality—such as race, receipt of public assistance, low educational attainment, and gaps inworkhistory—could be used by employers when no box is available on the application form to identifycriminals. This concern is supported by ethnographic work suggesting that employers have fears of

violencebyblackmenrelativetoothergroupsofapplicantsandactonthosefearswhenmakinghiringdecisions.Withoutdisconfirminginformationinthejobapplicationitself,employersmay(consciouslyorunconsciously)treatallblackmenasthoughtheyhaveacriminalrecord,effectivelyputtingall(ormost)of them in the same position as black ex-offenders. This research suggests that banning the box is notenough.Wemustalsogetridofthemind-setthatputsblackmen“inthebox.”

Debtor’sPrison

Theluckyfewwholandadecentjob—onethatpaysalivingwageandisinreasonableproximitytotheirresidence—oftendiscoverthatthesystemisstructuredinsuchawaythattheystillcannotsurviveinthemainstream,legaleconomy.Uponreleasefromprison,ex-offendersaretypicallysaddledwithlargedebts—financialshacklesthathobblethemastheystruggletobuildanewlife.Inthissystemofcontrol,liketheonethatprevailedduringJimCrow,one’s“debttosociety”oftenreflectsthecostofimprisonment.Throughout theUnited States, newly released prisoners are required tomake payments to a host of

agencies, including probation departments, courts, and child-support enforcement offices. In somejurisdictions,ex-offendersarebilledfordrugtestingandevenforthedrugtreatmenttheyaresupposedtoreceiveasaconditionofparole.These fees,costs,andfinesaregenerallyquitenew—createdby lawwithinthepasttwentyyears—andareassociatedwithawiderangeofoffenses.Everystatehasitsownrulesandregulationsgoverningtheirimposition.ExamplesofpreconvictionservicefeesimposedthroughouttheUnitedStatestodayincludejailbook-

infeesleviedatthetimeofarrest,jailperdiemsassessedtocoverthecostofpretrialdetention,publicdefender application fees charged when someone applies for court-appointed counsel, and the bailinvestigation fee imposed when the court determines the likelihood of the accused appearing at trial.Postconvictionfeesincludepresentencereportfees,publicdefenderrecoupmentfees,andfeesleviedonconvictedpersonsplaced ina residentialorwork-releaseprogram.Uponrelease,evenmore feesmayattach, including parole or probation service fees. Such fees are typically charged on amonthly basisduring theperiodof supervision.36 InOhio, forexample, acourt canorderprobationers topaya$50monthly supervision fee as a conditionofprobation.Failure topaymaywarrant additional communitycontrolsanctionsoramodificationintheoffender’ssentence.37Two-thirds of people detained in jails report annual incomes under $12,000 prior to arrest.

Predictably,mostex-offendersfind themselvesunable topay themanyfees,costs,andfinesassociatedwith their imprisonment, as well as their child-support debts (which continue to accumulate while aperson is incarcerated). As a result, many ex-offenders have their paychecks garnished. Federal lawprovidesthatachild-supportenforcementofficercangarnishupto65percentofanindividual’swagesforchildsupport.Ontopofthat,probationofficersinmoststatescanrequirethatanindividualdedicate35percentofhisorherincometowardthepaymentoffines,fees,surcharges,andrestitutionchargedbynumerousagencies.38Accordingly,aformerinmatelivingatorbelowthepovertylevelcanbechargedbyfourorfivedepartmentsatonceandcanberequiredtosurrender100percentofhisorherearnings.AsaNewYorkTimeseditorialsoberlyobserved,“Peoplecaughtinthisimpossiblepredicamentarelesslikelytoseekregularemployment,makingthemevenmoresusceptibletocriminalrelapse.”39Whetherornotex-offendersmaketherationalchoicetoparticipateintheillegaleconomy(ratherthan

haveupto100percentoftheirwagesgarnisheed),theymaystillgobacktoprisonforfailuretomeetthefinancialportionof theirprobationsupervisionrequirements.Onestudyofprobationrevocationsfoundthat12percentweredueatleastinparttoafailureofprobationerstopaytheirdebts.Someex-offendersarethrownbackinprisonsimplybecausetheyhavebeenunable—withnoplacetolive,andnodecentjob—topaybackthousandsofdollarsofprison-relatedfees,fines,andchildsupport.Someoffenders, likeOraLeeHurley,findthemselvestrappedbyfeesandfines inprisonandfindit

nearlyimpossibletogetout.HurleywasaprisonerheldattheGatewayDiversionCenterinAtlantain2006.Shewasimprisonedbecausesheoweda$705fine.Aspartofthediversionprogram,Hurleywaspermitted to work during the day and return to the center at night. “Five days a week she work[ed]fulltimeatarestaurantearning$6.50anhourand,aftertaxes,netabout$700amonth.”40Roomandboard

at the diversion centerwas about $600, and hermonthly transportation cost $52.Miscellaneous otherexpenses, including clothes, shoes, andpersonal items such as toothpaste, quickly exhaustedwhatwasleft.Hurley’sattorneydecriedthetrapshewasin:“Thisisasituationwhereifthiswomanwasabletowriteacheckfortheamountofthefine,shewouldbeoutofthere.Andbecauseshecan’t,she’sstillincustody.It’sassimpleasthat.”41Althoughsheworkedafulltimejobwhileincustody,mostofherincomewenttorepaythediversionprogram,nottheunderlyingfinethatputherincustodyinthefirstplace.ThisharshrealityharksbacktothedaysaftertheCivilWar,whenformerslavesandtheirdescendents

werearrestedforminorviolations,slappedwithheavyfines,and then imprisoneduntil theycouldpaytheirdebts.Theonlymeanstopayofftheirdebtswasthroughlaboronplantationsandfarms—knownasconvictleasing—orinprisonsthathadbeenconvertedtoworkfarms.Paidnexttonothing,convictswereeffectivelyenslavedinperpetuity,astheywereunabletoearnenoughtopayofftheirdebts.Today,manyinmatesworkinprison,typicallyearningfarlessthantheminimumwage—oftenlessthan

$3 per hour, sometimes as little as 25 cents. Their accounts are then “charged” for various expensesrelatedtotheirincarceration,makingitimpossibleforthemtosavethemoneythatotherwisewouldallowthemtopayofftheirdebtsorhelpthemmakeasuccessfultransitionwhenreleasedfromprison.Prisonersare typicallyreleasedwithonly theclothesontheirbacksandapittance ingatemoney.Sometimesthemoneyisbarelyenoughtocoverthecostofabusticketbackhome.

LetThemEatCake

Sohereyouare—anewlyreleasedprisoner—homeless,unemployed,andcarryingamountainofdebt.Howdoyou feedyourself?Care foryourchildren?There isnoclearanswer to thatquestion,butonethingisforsure:donotcountonthegovernmentforanyhelp.Notonlywillyoubedeniedhousing,butyoumaywellbedeniedfood.Welfare reform legislationsignedbyPresidentBillClinton in1996ended individualentitlements to

welfare and provided stateswith block grants. The TemporaryAssistance forNeedy Family Program(TANF) imposes a five-year lifetime limit onbenefits and requireswelfare recipients, including thosewhohaveyoungchildrenandlackchildcare,toworkinordertoreceivebenefits.Intheabstract,afive-yearlimitmaysoundreasonable.Butconsiderthis:Whenoneislabeledacriminal,forcedto“checkthebox” on applications for employment and housing, and burdened by thousands of dollars in debt, is itpossiblethatonewillliveonthebrinkofseverepovertyformorethanfiveyearsandthusrequirefoodstamps foroneselfandone’s family?Until1996, therewasabasicunderstanding thatpoverty-strickenmothersraisingchildrenshouldbeaffordedsomeminimallevelofassistancewithfoodandshelter.The five-year limit on benefits, however, is not the law’sworst feature.The law also requires that

statespermanentlybarindividualswithdrug-relatedfelonyconvictionsfromreceivingfederallyfundedpublicassistance.Noexceptionsaremadetothefelonydrugban.Accordingly,pregnantwomen,womenraisingyoungchildren,people indrug treatmentor recovery, andpeople suffering fromHIV/AIDSareineligible for food assistance for the rest of their lives—simply because they were once caught withdrugs.

TheSilentMinority

If shackling former prisoners with a lifetime of debt and authorizing discrimination against them inemployment,housing,education,andpublicbenefits isnotenoughtosendthemessagethat theyarenotwanted andnot even considered full citizens, then strippingvoting rights from those labeled criminalssurelygetsthepointacross.Forty-eightstatesand theDistrictofColumbiaprohibit inmatesfromvotingwhile incarceratedfora

felonyoffense.Onlytwostates—MaineandVermont—permitinmatestovote.Thevastmajorityofstatescontinue to withhold the right to vote when prisoners are released on parole. Even after the term ofpunishmentexpires,somestatesdenytherighttovoteforaperiodrangingfromanumberofyearstotherestofone’slife.42This is far from the norm in other countries—like Germany, for instance, which allows (and even

encourages)prisonerstovote.Infact,abouthalfofEuropeancountriesallowallincarceratedpeopletovote,whileothersdisqualifyonlyasmallnumberofprisonersfromthepolls.43Prisonersvoteeitherintheir correctional facilities or by someversionof absenteeballot in their townof previous residence.AlmostallofthecountriesthatplacesomerestrictionsonvotinginprisonareinEasternEurope,partoftheformerCommunistbloc.44Noothercountryintheworlddisenfranchisespeoplewhoarereleasedfromprisoninamannereven

remotelyresemblingtheUnitedStates.Infact,theUnitedNationsHumanRightsCommitteehaschargedthat U.S. disenfranchisement policies are discriminatory and violate international law. In those fewEuropeancountriesthatpermitlimitedpostprisondisqualification,thesanctionisverynarrowlytailoredandthenumberofpeopledisenfranchisedisprobablyinthedozensorhundreds.45IntheUnitedStates,bycontrast,votingdisqualificationuponreleasefromprison isautomatic,withno legitimatepurpose,andaffectsmillions.Eventhoseformerprisonerswhoaretechnicallyeligibletovotefrequentlyremaindisenfranchisedfor

life.Everystatehasdevelopeditsownprocessforrestoringvotingrightstoex-offenders.Typicallytherestorationprocessisabureaucraticmazethatrequiresthepaymentoffinesorcourtcosts.Theprocessisso cumbersome, confusing, and onerous that many ex-offenders who are theoretically eligible to votenevermanage toget their voting rights back.46 Throughoutmuch of theUnitedStates, ex-offenders areexpectedtopayfinesandcourtcosts,andsubmitpaperworktomultipleagenciesinanefforttowinbacka right that shouldnever havebeen taken away in a democracy.Thesebureaucraticminefields are themodern-day equivalent of poll taxes and literacy tests—“colorblind” rules designed tomake voting apracticalimpossibilityforagroupdefinedlargelybyrace.Themessagecommunicatedbyfelondisenfranchisementlaws,policies,andbureaucraticproceduresis

notlostonthose,suchasClintonDrake,whoareeffectivelybarredfromvotingforlife.47Drake,afifty-five-year-oldAfricanAmericanman inMontgomery,Alabama,wasarrested in1988forpossessionofmarijuana.Fiveyears later,hewasarrestedagain, this timeforhavingabout$10worthof thedrugonhim.Facingbetweentenandtwentyyearsinprisonasarepeatoffender,Drake,aVietnamveteranand,atthetime,acookonalocalairforcebase,tookhispublicdefender’sadviceandacceptedapleabargain.Under the plea agreement, hewould “only” have to spend five years behind bars. Five years for fivejoints.Oncereleased,Drakefoundhewasforbiddenbylawfromvotinguntilhepaidhis$900incourtcosts

—an impossible task,given thathewasunemployedand the low-wage jobshemightconceivably findwould never allow him to accumulate hundreds of dollars in savings. For all practical purposes, hewouldneverbeabletovoteagain.Shortlybeforethe2004presidentialelection,hesaidindespair:

Iputmylifeonthelineforthiscountry.Tome,notvotingisnotright;itleadtoalotoffrustration,alotofanger.Myson’sinIraq.InthearmyjustlikeIwas.Myoldestson,hefoughtinthefirstPersianGulfconflict.HewasintheMarines.Thisismybabysonoverthererightnow.ButI’mnotabletovote. They say I owe $900 in fines. To me, that’s a poll tax. You’ve got to pay to vote. It’s“restitution,”theysay.IcameoffparoleonOctober13,1999,butI’mstillnotallowedtovote.LasttimeIvotedwasin’88.BushversusDukakis.Bushwon.IvotedforDukakis.Ifitwasuptome,I’dvotehissonoutthistimetoo.IknowalotoffriendsgotthesamecaseslikeIgot,notabletovote.AlotofguysdoingthesamethingslikeIwasdoing.Justmarijuana.TheytreatmarijuanainAlabamalikeyoucommittedtreasonorsomething.Iwasonthe1965votingrightsmarchfromSelma.Iwasfifteenyearsold.Ateighteen,IwasinVietnamfightingformycountry.Andnow?Unemployedandtheywon’tallowmetovote.48

Drake’svote,alongwiththevotesofmillionsofotherpeoplelabeledfelons,mighthavemadearealdifference in 2004. There is no doubt their votes would have changed things in 2000. Following theelection,itwaswidelyreportedthat,hadthe600,000formerfelonswhohadcompletedtheirsentenceinFloridabeenallowedtovote,AlGorewouldhavebeenelectedpresidentoftheUnitedStatesratherthanGeorgeW.Bush.49Fouryearslater,voterregistrationworkersintheSouthencounteredscoresofex-offenderswhowere

reluctanttoregistertovote,eveniftheyweretechnicallyeligible,becausetheywerescaredtohaveanycontactwith governmental authorities.Many onwelfarewereworried that any little thing they did tobring attention to themselvesmight put their food stamps at risk. Others had been told by parole andprobationofficers that theycouldnotvote,andalthough itwasnot true, theybelieved it,and thenewsspreadlikewildfire.“Howlongyouthinkittakeifsomeonetellsyouyoucan’tvotebeforeitspreads?”askedoneex-offender.“It’sbeenyearsandyearspeopletellingyouyoucan’tvote.Youliveinaslum,you’renotcounted.”50Eventhosewhoknewtheywereeligibletoregisterworriedthatregisteringtovotewouldsomehow

attractattentiontothem—perhapslandthembackinjail.Whilethismightstrikesomeasparanoia,manySouthernblackshavevividmemoriesoftheharshconsequencesthatbefelltheirparentsandgrandparentswhoattemptedtovoteindefianceofpolltaxes,literacytests,andotherdevicesadoptedtosuppresstheblackvote.ManywereterrorizedbytheKlan.Today,ex-offendersliveinconstantfearofadifferentformof racial repression—racial profiling, police brutality, and revocation of parole. One investigativejournalistdescribedthesituationthisway:“Overwhelmingly,blackpeople[inMississippi]arescaredofany form of contact with authorities they saw as looking for excuses to reincarcerate them. Inneighborhoodafterneighborhood,thegrandchildrenofthecivilrightspioneersfromthe1950swereasscaredtovote,becauseofprisonsandthethreatofprisons,astheirgrandparentswerehalfacenturyagobecauseof the threatof the lynchmob.”51NshombiLambright,of theJacksonACLU,concurs.“Peoplearen’t even trying to get their vote back,” she said. “It’s hard just getting them to attempt to register.They’reterrorized.They’resoscaredofgoingbacktojailthattheywon’teventryit.”52Researchindicatesthatalargenumberofcloseelectionswouldhavecomeoutdifferentlyiffelonshad

beenallowedtovote,includingatleastsevensenatorialracesbetween1980and2000.53Theimpactonthosemajorelectionsundoubtedlywouldbegreaterifallthosedeterredorpreventedfromvotingweretaken into account.But as ex-offenderswill hasten to emphasize, it is not just the “big” elections thatmatter.Oneex-offenderput it thisway:“Ihaveno right tovoteon theschool referendums that ...willaffectmychildren.Ihavenorighttovoteonhowmytaxesisgoingtobespentorused,whichIhavetopay whether I’m a felon or not, you know? So basically I’ve lost all voice or control over mygovernment....IgetmadbecauseIcan’tsayanythingbecauseIdon’thaveavoice.”54

Thosewhodohavetheirvotingrightsrestoredoftendescribeafeelingofvalidation,evenpride.“Igota voice now,” said Willa Womack, a forty-four-year-old African American woman who had beenincarceratedondrugcharges.“Icandecidenowwhowillbemygovernor,whowillbemypresident.Ihaveavotenow.Ifeellikesomebody.It’safeelingofrelieffromwhereIcamefrom—thatI’mactuallysomebody.”55

ThePariahs

ForAmericanswhoarenotcaughtup in thissystemofcontrol, itcanbedifficult to imaginewhat lifewouldbelikeifdiscriminationagainstyouwereperfectlylegal—ifyouwerenotallowedtoparticipateinthepoliticalsystemandifyouwerenoteveneligibleforfoodstampsorwelfareandcouldbedeniedhousingassistance.Yetasbadastheseformsofdiscriminationare,manyex-offenderswilltellyouthattheformalmechanismsofexclusionarenottheworstofit.Theshameandstigmathatfollowsyoufortherestofyourlife—thatistheworst.Itisnotjustthejobdenialbutthelookthatflashesacrossthefaceofapotentialemployerwhenhenoticesthat“thebox”hasbeenchecked—thewayhesuddenlyrefusestolookyouintheeye.Itisnotmerelythedenialofthehousingapplicationbuttheshameofbeingagrownmanwhohastobeghisgrandmotherforaplacetosleepatnight.Itisnotsimplythedenialoftherighttovotebuttheshameonefeelswhenaco-workerinnocentlyasks,“WhoyougonnavoteforonTuesday?”Oneneednotbeformallyconvictedinacourtoflawtobesubjecttothisshameandstigma.Aslongas

you“looklike”or“seemlike”acriminal,youaretreatedwiththesamesuspicionandcontempt,notjustbypolice,securityguards,orhallmonitorsatyourschool,butalsobythewomanwhocrossesthestreettoavoidyouandbythestoreemployeeswhofollowyouthroughtheaisles,eagertocatchyouintheactofbeingthe“criminalblackman”—thearchetypalfigurewhojustifiestheNewJimCrow.56Practically from cradle to grave, black males in urban ghettos are treated like current or future

criminals.Onemay learn tocopewith thestigmaofcriminality,but like thestigmaof race, theprisonlabelisnotsomethingthatablackmanintheghettocaneverfullyescape.Forthosenewlyreleasedfromprison, the pain is particularly acute.AsDorseyNunn, an ex-offender and cofounder ofAll ofUs orNone,onceputit,“Thebiggesthurdleyougottagetoverwhenyouwalkoutthoseprisongatesisshame—thatshame,thatstigma,thatlabel,thatthingyouweararoundyournecksaying‘I’macriminal.’It’slikeayokearoundyourneck,andit’lldragyoudown,evenkillyouifyouletit.”Manyex-offendersexperienceanexistentialangstassociatedwith theirpermanentsocialexclusion.Henry,ayoungAfricanAmericanconvictedofafelony,explains,“[It’slike]youbrokethelaw,youbad.Youbrokethelaw,bang—you’renotpartofusanymore.”57Thatsentimentissharedbyawoman,currentlyincarcerated,whodescribedtheexperiencethisway:

WhenIleavehereitwillbeverydifficultformeinthesensethatI’mafelon.ThatIwillalwaysbeafelon...formetoleavehere,itwillaffectmyjob,itwillaffectmyeducation...custody[ofmychildren], it can affect child support, it can affect everywhere—family, friends, housing....Peoplethatareconvictedofdrugcrimescan’tevengethousinganymore....Yes,Ididmyprisontime.Howlongareyougoingtopunishmeasaresultofit?Andnotonlyonpaper,I’monlyonpaperfortenmonthswhenIleavehere,that’salltheparoleIhave.But,thatparoleisn’tgoingtobeanything.It’sthe housing, it’s the credit reestablishing.... I mean even to go into the school, to work with mychild’sclass—andI’mnotasexoffender—butallIneedisoneparentwhosays,“Isn’tsheafelon?Idon’twantherwithmychild.”58

Thepermanenceofone’ssocialexileisoftenthehardesttoswallow.Formanyitseemsinconceivablethat,foraminoroffense,youcanbesubjectedtodiscrimination,scorn,andexclusionfortherestofyourlife.HumanRightsWatch, in its report documenting the experiencesofAmerica’sundercaste, tells thestory of a fifty-seven-year-oldAfricanAmericanwoman, denied rental housing by a federally fundedlandlord due to a minor conviction she did not even know was on her record. After being refusedreconsideration,sheaskedhercaseworkerinpainedexasperation,“AmIgoingtobeacriminalfortherestofmylife?”59Whensomeoneisconvictedofacrimetoday,their“debttosociety”isneverpaid.The“cruelhand”

thatFrederickDouglassspokeofmorethan150yearsagohasappearedonceagain.Inthisnewsystemofcontrol,likethelast,manyblackmen“holdup[their]heads,ifatall,againstthewitheringinfluenceofanation’s scorn and contempt.” Willie Johnson, a forty-three-year-old African American man recentlyreleasedfromprisoninOhio,explaineditthisway:

Myfelonyconvictionhasbeenlikeamentalpunishment,becauseofalltheobstacles....EverytimeIgotoputina[job]application—Ihavehadthreecompanieshiremeandtellmetocometoworkthenext day. But then the day before theywill call and tellme don’t come in—because you have afelony.Andthatiswhatisdevastatingbecauseyouthinkyouareabouttogotoworkandtheycallyouandsaybecauseofyourfelonywecan’thire[you].Ihaverunintothisatleastadozentimes.TwotimesIgotverydepressedandsadbecauseIcouldn’ttakecareofmyselfasaman.ItwaslikeIwanted to give up—because in society nobodywants to give us a helping hand.Right now I amconsideredhomeless.IhaveneverbeenhomelessuntilIleftthepenitentiary,andnowIknowwhatitfeelstobehomeless.IfitwasnotformyfamilyIwouldbeinthestreetssleepinginthecold....We[blackmen]havethreestrikesagainstus:1)becauseweareblack,and2)becauseweareablackmale,andthefinalstrikeisafelony.Thesearethegreatestthreestrikesthatablackmanhasagainsthiminthiscountry.Ihavefriendswhodon’thaveafelony—andhaveahardtimegettingajob.Butifablackmancan’t finda job to takecareofhimself—he isashamed thathecan’t takecareofhischildren.60

Notsurprisingly,formanyblackmen,thehurtanddepressiongiveswaytoanger.AblackministerinWaterloo,Mississippi,explainedhisoutrageatthefatethathasbefallenAfricanAmericansinthepost-civilrightsera.“It’sahustle,”hesaidangrily.“‘Felony’isthenewN-word.Theydon’thavetocallyouaniggeranymore.Theyjustsayyou’reafelon.Ineveryghettoyouseealarmingnumbersofyoungmenwith felony convictions.Once you have that felony stamp, your hope for employment, for any kind ofintegration into society, it begins to fade out.Today’s lynching is a felony charge.Today’s lynching isincarceration. Today’s lynch mobs are professionals. They have a badge; they have a law degree. Afelonyisamodernwayofsaying,‘I’mgoingtohangyouupandburnyou.’OnceyougetthatF,you’reonfire.”61Remarkably,itisnotuncommontodaytohearmediapundits,politicians,socialcritics,andcelebrities

—mostnotablyBillCosby—complainthatthebiggestproblemblackmenhavetodayisthatthey“havenoshame.”Manyworry that prison time has become a badge of honor in some communities—“a rite ofpassage”isthetermmostoftenusedinthepress.Othersclaimthatinner-cityresidentsnolongersharethesamevaluesystemasmainstreamsociety,andthereforearenotstigmatizedbycriminality.YetasDonaldBraman, authorofDoingTimeon theOutside, states, “One can only assume thatmost participants inthesediscussionhavehadlittledirectcontactwiththefamiliesandcommunitiestheyarediscussing.”62Overa four-yearperiod,Bramanconductedamajorethnographicstudyof familiesaffectedbymass

incarceration inWashington,D.C., a citywhere threeoutof every fouryoungblackmencanexpect tospendsometimebehindbars.63Hefoundthat,contrarytopopularbelief,theyoungmenlabeledcriminalsandtheirfamiliesareprofoundlyhurtandstigmatizedbytheirstatus:“Theyarenotshameless;theyfeelthe stigma that accompanies not only incarceration but all the other stereotypes that accompany it—fatherlessness,poverty,andoften,despiteeveryintenttomakeitotherwise,diminishedlove.”TheresultsofBraman’sstudyhavebeenlargelycorroboratedbysimilarstudieselsewhereintheUnitedStates.64These studies indicate that the biggest problem the black community may face today is not

“shamelessness” but rather the severe isolation, distrust, and alienation created bymass incarceration.DuringJimCrow,blackswereseverelystigmatizedandsegregatedonthebasisofrace,butintheirowncommunitiestheycouldfindsupport,solidarity,acceptance—love.Today,whenthoselabeledcriminalsreturnto theircommunities, theyareoftenmetwithscornandcontempt,not justbyemployers,welfare

workers,andhousingofficials,butalsobytheirownneighbors,teachers,andevenmembersoftheirownfamilies.This is so, evenwhen theyhavebeen imprisoned forminoroffenses, suchaspossessionandsaleofasmallamountofdrugs.Youngblackmalesintheirteensareoftentold“you’llamounttonothing”or “you’ll find yourself back in jail, just like your father”—anot-so-subtle suggestion that a shamefuldefect lies deep within them, an inherited trait perhaps—part of their genetic makeup. “You are acriminal,nothingbutacriminal.Youareanogoodcriminal.”65Theangerandfrustrationdirectedatyoungblackmenreturninghomefromprison isunderstandable,

given that theyare returning tocommunities thatarehurtby joblessnessandcrime.Thesecommunitiesdesperately need their young men to be holding down jobs and supporting their families, rather thanwastingawayinprisoncells.WhilethereiswidespreadrecognitionthattheWaronDrugsisracistandthatpoliticianshaverefusedtoinvestinjobsorschoolsintheircommunities,parentsofoffendersandex-offenders still feel intense shame—shame that their children have turned to crime despite the lack ofobvious alternatives. One mother of an incarcerated teen, Constance, described her angst this way:“Regardlessofwhatyoufeellikeyou’vedoneforyourkid,itstillcomesbackonyou,andyoufeellike,‘Well,maybeIdidsomethingwrong.MaybeImessedup.Youknow,maybeifIhadadiditthisway,thenitwouldn’tahappenedthatway.’”Afterherson’sarrest,shecouldnotbringherselftotellfriendsandrelativesandkeptthefamily’ssufferingprivate.Constanceisnotalone.

EerieSilence

David Braman’s ethnographic research shows that mass incarceration, far from reducing the stigmaassociatedwithcriminality,actuallycreatesadeepsilenceincommunitiesofcolor,onerootedinshame.Imprisonment isconsideredsoshameful thatmanypeopleavoid talkingabout it,evenwithin theirownfamilies. Some, likeConstance, are silent because they blame themselves for their children’s fate andbelievethatothersblamethemaswell.Othersaresilentbecausetheybelievehidingthetruthwillprotectfriendsandfamilymembers—e.g.,“Idon’tknowwhat[hisincarceration]woulddotohisaunt.Shejustthinks so highly of him.” Others claim that a loved one’s criminality is a private, family matter:“Somebody’sbusinessisnobody’sbusiness.”66Remarkably,evenincommunitiesdevastatedbymassincarceration,manypeoplestrugglingtothecope

with the stigma of imprisonment have no idea that their neighbors are strugglingwith the same grief,shame,andisolation.Bramanreportedthat“whenIaskedparticipants[inthestudy]iftheyknewofotherpeopleintheneighborhood,manydidknowofoneortwooutofthedozensofhouseholdsontheblockthat had members incarcerated but did not feel comfortable talking with others.”67 This type ofphenomenonhasbeendescribedinthepsychologicalliteratureaspluralisticignorance,inwhichpeoplemisjudgethenorm.Oneexample isfoundinstudiesofcollegefreshmanwhooverestimate thedrinkingamongother freshman.68When it comes to familiesofprisoners,however, theirunderestimationof theextent of incarceration in their communities exacerbates their sense of isolation by making theimprisonmentoftheirfamilymembersseemmoreabnormalthanitis.Even in church, a place where many people seek solace in times of grief and sorrow, families of

prisoners often keep secret the imprisonment of their children or relatives.As onewoman respondedwhen asked if she could turn to churchmembers for support, “Church? Iwouldn’t dare tell anyone atchurch.”69Farfrombeingaplaceofcomfortorrefuge,churchescanbeaplacewherejudgment,shame,and contempt are felt most acutely. Services in black churches frequently contain a strongmixture ofconcern for the less fortunate and a call to personal responsibility. As Cathy Cohen has observed,ministers andmembers of black congregations have helped to developwhat she calls the “indigenousconstructedimageof‘good,blackChristianfolk.’”70Blackchurches,inthisculturalnarrative,areplaceswhere the “good”blackpeople in the community canbe found.To the extent that the imprisonment ofone’s son or relative (or one’s own imprisonment) is experienced as a personal failure—a failure ofpersonalresponsibility—churchcanbeasourceoffreshpainratherthancomfort.Thosewhohavehadpositiveexperiencesofacceptanceandsympathyafterdisclosingthestatusofa

lovedone (or their own status) report they are better able to cope.Notably, however, even after suchpositive experiences, most family members remain committed to maintaining tight control over whoknowsandwhodoesnotknowaboutthestatusoftheirlovedone.AccordingtoBraman,notoneofthefamily members in his study “had ‘come out’ completely to their extended families at church and atwork.”71

Passing(Redux)

Lying about incarcerated family members is another common coping strategy—a form of passing.Whereaslight-skinnedblacksduringtheJimCrowerasometimescutoffrelationswithfriendsandfamilyinaneffort to“pass”aswhiteandenjoytheupwardmobilityandprivilegeassociatedwithwhiteness,todaymany familymembers of prisoners lie and try to hide the status of their relatives in an effort tomitigatethestigmaofcriminality.Thisisespeciallythecaseatwork—employmentsettingswherefamilymembersinteractwithpeopletheybelievecouldnotpossiblyunderstandwhattheyaregoingthrough.Onewoman,Ruth,whoseyoungerbrother is incarcerated, saysshewouldneverdiscussherbrother

withherco-workersorsupervisor,thoughtheyhavelongsharedinformationabouttheirpersonallives.“Youknow,Italkto[mysupervisor]aboutstuff,butnotthis.Thiswastoomuch,anditdefinitelymade,wellitwasjusthardertotalktohim.Hewantstoknowhowmybrotheris.Ijustcan’ttellittohim.Whatdoesheknowaboutprison?”72Whenaskedtoexplainwhyherwhiteco-workersandsupervisorswouldhavetroubleunderstandingherbrother’s incarceration,Ruthexplainedthat itwasnot just incarcerationbut“everything”—everythingrelatedtorace.Asanexample,shementionednightswhensheworkslate:“Itellmybossallthetime,Isay,‘Ifyouwantmetotakeataxiyougodownthereandflagoneforme.I’mnotgoingout thereandstandtwentyminutesforacabwhenthey’ll runovermetoget toyou.’ ...He’swhiteand,see,hedon’tknowthedifferencebecausehe’sfromSeattle,Washington.Helooksatmerealstrange,like,‘Whatareyoutalkingabout?’”73Manyex-offendersandfamiliesofprisonersaredesperatelyattemptingtobeperceivedaspartofthe

modern upwardly mobile class, even if their income does not place them in it. Ex-offenders lie (byrefusing to check the box on employment applications), and family members lie through omission orobfuscation because they are painfully aware of the historically intransigent stereotypes of criminal,dysfunctionalfamiliesthatpervadenotonlypublicdiscussionsofinnercitiesbutoftheblackcommunityingeneral.Thisawarenesscanleadbeyondshametoaplaceofself-hate.Onemotherofanincarceratedteenagerdescribedtheself-hatesheperceivesintheblackcommunity

thisway:Allyourlifeyoubeentaughtthatyou’renotaworthyperson,orsomethingiswrongwithyou.Soyoudon’thavenorespectforyourself.See,peopleofcolorhave—notallofthem,butalotofthem—havepoorself-esteem,becausewe’vebeenbranded.Wehateourselves,youknow.Wehavebeenprogrammedthatit’ssomethingthat’swrongwithus.Wehateourselves.74

Thisself-hate,sheexplained,doesnotaffectjusttheyoungboyswhofindthemselvesgettingintroubleandfulfillingthenegativeexpectationsofthoseinthecommunityandbeyond.Self-hateisalsopartofthereasonpeopleinherneighborhooddonotspeaktoeachotherabouttheimpactofincarcerationontheirfamilies and their lives. In her nearly all-black neighborhood, she worries about what the neighborswouldthinkaboutherifsherevealedthathersonhadbeenlabeledacriminal:“It’shard,because,likeIsay...we’vebeenlabeledallourlivesthatwearethebadpeople.”75The silence this stigma engenders among familymembers, neighbors, friends, relatives, co-workers,

andstrangersisperhapsthemostpainful—yetleastacknowledged—aspectofthenewsystemofcontrol.ThehistoricalanthropologistGeraldSideroncewrote,“Wecanhavenosignificantunderstandingofanycultureunlesswealsoknowthesilencesthatwereinstitutionallycreatedandguaranteedalongwithit.”76NowhereisthatobservationmorerelevantinAmericansocietytodaythaninananalysisofthecultureofmassincarceration.Descriptionsofthesilencethathoversovermassincarcerationarerarebecausepeople—whetherthey

are social scientists, judges,politicians,or reporters—areusuallymore interested in speech, acts, and

eventsthaninthenegativefieldofsilenceandestrangementthatlurksbeneaththesurface.But,asBramanrightlynotes,thosewholiveintheshadowsofthissilencearedevaluedashumanbeings:

Thereisarepressionofselfexperiencedbythesefamiliesintheirsilence.Theretreatofamotherorwife from friendships in churchandatwork, thewordsnot spokenbetween friends, the enduringsilenceofchildrenwhoguardwhatforthemisprofoundandpowerfulinformation—allaretellingindicatorsofthesocialeffectsofincarceration.Asrelationshipsbetweenfamilyandfriendsbecomestrained or false, not only are people’s understandings of one another diminished, but, becausepeoplearesocial,theythemselvesarediminishedaswell.77

Theharmdoneby this social silence ismore than interpersonal.Thesilence—drivenbystigmaandfear of shame—results in a repression of public thought, a collective denial of lived experience. AsBramanputsit,“Byforcingoutofpublicviewthestrugglesthatthesefamiliesfaceinthemostsimpleandfundamentalacts—livingtogetherandcaringforoneanother—thisbroadersocialsilencemakesitseemas though [ghetto families] simply are ‘that way’: broken, valueless, irreparable.”78 It also makescommunityhealingandcollectivepoliticalactionnexttoimpossible.

GangstaLove

For some, the notion that black communities are severely stigmatized and shamed by criminality iscounterintuitive: if incarceration in many urban areas is the statistical norm, why isn’t it sociallynormative aswell? It is true that imprisonment has become “normal” in ghetto communities. Inmajorcities across theUnited States, themajority of young blackmen are under the control of the criminaljustice systemor saddledwith criminal records.But just because the prison label has becomenormaldoesnotmean that it isgenerallyviewedasacceptable.Poorpeopleofcolor, likeotherAmericans—indeedlikenearlyeveryonearoundtheworld—wantsafestreets,peacefulcommunities,healthyfamilies,goodjobs,andmeaningfulopportunitiestocontributetosociety.Thenotionthatghettofamiliesdonot,infact,wantthosethings,andinsteadareperfectlycontenttoliveincrime-riddencommunities,feelingnoshameorregretaboutthefateoftheiryoungmenis,quitesimply,racist.Itisimpossibletoimaginethatwewouldbelievesuchathingaboutwhites.Thepredictableresponseis:Whataboutgangstarapandthecultureofviolencethathasbeenembraced

bysomanyblackyouth? Is therenot some truth to thenotion thatblackculturehasdevolved in recentyears,asreflectedinyouthstandingonthestreetcornerswithpantssaggingbelowtheirrearsandrappersboastingaboutbeatingtheir“hos”andgoingtojail?Istherenotsomereasontowonderwhethertheblackcommunity,tosomeextent,haslostitsmoralcompass?Theeasyansweristosayyesandwagafingeratthosewhoarebehavingbadly.Thatistheroadmost

traveled,andithasnotmadeabitofdifference.ThemediafawnoverBillCosbyandotherfigureswhentheygivesternlecturestoblackaudiencesaboutblackmenfailingtobegoodfathersandfailingtoleadrespectablelives.Theyactasthoughthisisamessageblackaudienceshavenotheardmanytimesbeforefromtheirministers,fromtheirfamilymembers,andfrompoliticianswhotalkabout theneedformore“personal responsibility.” Many seem genuinely surprised that blacks in the audience applaud thesemessages;forthem,itisapparentlynewsthatblackpeoplethinkmenshouldbegoodfathersandhelptosupporttheirfamilies.Themoredifficultanswer—themorecourageousone—istosayyes,yesweshouldbeconcernedabout

thebehaviorofmentrappedinghettocommunities,butthedeepfailureofmoralityisourown.EconomistGlenn Loury once posed the question: “are we willing to cast ourselves as a society that createscrimogenicconditionsforsomeofitsmembers,andthenacts-outritualsofpunishmentagainstthemasifengaged in some awful form of human sacrifice?” A similar question can be posed with respect toshamingthosetrappedinghettos:arewewillingtodemonizeapopulation,declareawaragainstthem,and then standbackandheap shameandcontemptupon them for failing tobehave likemodel citizenswhileunderattack?Inthisregard,itishelpfultostepbackandputthebehaviorofyoungblackmenwhoappeartoembrace

“gangstaculture” in theproperperspective.There isabsolutelynothingabnormalorsurprisingaboutaseverelystigmatizedgroupembracing their stigma.Psychologistshave longobserved thatwhenpeoplefeelhopelesslystigmatized,apowerfulcopingstrategy—oftentheonlyapparentroutetoself-esteem—isembracingone’sstigmatizedidentity.Hence,“blackisbeautiful”and“gaypride”—slogansandanthemsof political movements aimed at ending not only legal discrimination, but the stigma that justified it.Indeed,theactofembracingone’sstigmaisnevermerelyapsychologicalmaneuver;itisapoliticalact—anactofresistanceanddefianceinasocietythatseekstodemeanagroupbasedonaninalterabletrait.Asagayactivistonceputit,“Onlybyfullyembracingthestigmaitselfcanoneneutralizethestingandmakeitlaughable.”79Forthoseblackyouthwhoareconstantlyfollowedbythepoliceandshamedbyteachers,relatives,and

strangers,embracingthestigmaofcriminalityisanactofrebellion—anattempttocarveoutapositive

identityinasocietythatoffersthemlittlemorethanscorn,contempt,andconstantsurveillance.Ronny,asixteen-year-oldAfricanAmericanonprobationforadrug-relatedoffense,explainsitthisway:

MygrandmakeepsaskingmeaboutwhenI’mgonnagetarrestedagain.Shethinksjust’causeIwentinbefore,Iwillgoinagain....Atmyschoolmyteacherstalkaboutcallingthecop[s]againtotakemeaway....[The]copkeepscheckinguponme.He’salwaysattheparkmakingsureIdon’tgetintotrouble again....My P.O. [probation officer] is always knocking onmy door talking shit tome....EvenattheBYA[thelocalyouthdevelopmentorganization]thestafftreatmelikeI’mafuckup....Shitdon’tchange.Itdoesn’tmatterwhereIgo,I’mseenasacriminal.Ijustsay,ifyouaregoingtotreatmeasacriminalthenI’mgonnatreatyoulikeIamone,youfeelme?I’mgonnamakeyoushakesothatyoucansaythatthereisareasonforcallingmeacriminal....IgrewupknowingthatIhadtoshowthesefools[adultswhocriminalizeyouth]thatIwasn’tgoingtotaketheirshit.IstartedtoactlikeathugevenifIwasn’tone....Partofitwasmetryingtobehard,theotherpartwasthemtreatingmelikeacriminal.80

The problem, of course, is that embracing criminality—while a natural response to the stigma—isinherentlyself-defeatinganddestructive.While“blackisbeautiful”isapowerfulantidotetothelogicofJimCrow,and“gaypride”isaliberatingmottoforthosechallenginghomophobia,thenaturalcorollaryforyoungmentrappedintheghettointheeraofmassincarcerationissomethingakinto“gangstalove.”While race and sexual orientation are perfectly appropriate aspects of one’s identity to embrace,criminalityforitsownsakemostcertainlyisnot.TheWaronDrugshasgreatlyexacerbatedtheproblemsassociatedwithdrugabuse,ratherthansolvedthem,butthefactremainsthattheviolenceassociatedwiththeillegaldrugtradeisnothingtobecelebrated.Blackcrimecripplestheblackcommunityanddoesnofavorstotheindividualoffender.So herein lies the paradox and predicament of young blackmen labeled criminals.Awar has been

declaredonthem,andtheyhavebeenroundedupforengaginginpreciselythesamecrimesthatgolargelyignored inmiddle-andupper-classwhitecommunities—possessionandsaleof illegaldrugs.For thoseresiding in ghetto communities, employment is scarce—often nonexistent. Schools located in ghettocommunitiesmore closely resemble prisons than places of learning, creativity, ormoral development.Andbecausethedrugwarhasbeenragingfordecadesnow,theparentsofchildrencomingofagetodayweretargetsofthedrugwaraswell.Asaresult,manyfathersareinprison,andthosewhoare“free”beartheprisonlabel.Theyareoftenunabletoprovidefor,ormeaningfullycontributeto,afamily.Anywonder,then,thatmanyyouthembracetheirstigmatizedidentityasameansofsurvivalinthisnewcastesystem?Shouldwebe shockedwhen they turn to gangsor fellow inmates for supportwhennoviablefamilysupportstructureexists?Afterall,inmanyrespects,theyaresimplydoingwhatblackpeopledidduringtheJimCrowera—theyareturningtoeachotherforsupportandsolaceinasocietythatdespisesthem.Yetwhen theseyoungpeopledowhat all severely stigmatizedgroupsdo—try to copeby turning to

eachotherandembracingtheirstigmainadesperateefforttoregainsomemeasureofselfesteem—we,asasociety,heapmoreshameandcontemptuponthem.Wetellthemtheirfriendsare“nogood,”thattheywill“amounttonothing,”thattheyare“wastingtheirlives,”andthat“they’renothingbutcriminals.”Wecondemntheirbaggypants(afashiontrendthatmimicsprison-issuepants)andthemusicthatglorifiesalifemanyfeeltheycannotavoid.Whenwearedoneshamingthem,wethrowupourhandsandthenturnourbacksastheyarecartedofftojail.

TheMinstrelShow

Noneof theforegoingshouldbeinterpretedasanexcusefor theviolence,decadence,ormisogynythatpervades what has come to be known as gangsta culture. The images and messages are extremelydamaging.Onanaveragenight,oneneedengageinonlyafewminutesofchannelsurfingduringprime-time hours to stumble across images of gangsta culture on television. The images are so familiar nodescriptionisnecessaryhere.OftentheseimagesemanatefromBETorblack-themedrealityshowsandthusareconsidered“authentic”expressionsofblackattitudes,culture,andmores.Again, though, it is useful to put the commodification of gangsta culture in proper perspective. The

worstofgangstarapandotherformsofblaxploitation(suchasVH1’sFlavorofLove)isbestunderstoodasamodern-dayminstrelshow,onlythistimetelevisedaroundtheclockforaworldwideaudience.Itisa for-profit display of the worst racial stereotypes and images associated with the era of massincarceration—anerainwhichblackpeoplearecriminalizedandportrayedasout-of-control,shameless,violent,oversexed,andgenerallyundeserving.LiketheminstrelshowsoftheslaveryandJimCroweras,today’sdisplaysaregenerallydesignedfor

whiteaudiences.Themajorityofconsumersofgangsta raparewhite, suburban teenagers.VH1had itsbestratingseverforthefirstseasonofFlavorofLove—ratingsdrivenbylargewhiteaudiences.MTVhasexpandeditsofferingsofblack-themedrealityshowsinthehopesofattractingthesamecrowd.Theprofitstobemadefromracialstigmaareconsiderable,andthefactthatblacks—aswellaswhites—treatracial oppression as a commodity for consumption is not surprising. It is a familiar form of blackcomplicitywithracializedsystemsofcontrol.Many people are unaware that, although minstrel shows were plainly designed to pander to white

racism and tomakewhites feel comfortablewith—indeed, entertained by—racial oppression,AfricanAmericansformeda largepartof theblackminstrels’audience.Infact, theirnumbersweresogreat insomeareasthattheaterownershadtorelaxrulessegregatingblackpatronsandrestrictingthemtocertainareasofthetheater.81Historianshave longdebatedwhyblackswouldattendminstrel showswhen the imagesandcontent

weresoblatantlyracist.Minstrelsprojectedagreatlyromanticizedandexaggeratedimageofblacklifeon plantations with cheerful, simple, grinning slaves always ready to sing, dance, and please theirmasters. Some have suggested that perhaps blacks felt in on the joke, laughing at the over-the-topcharactersfromasenseof“in-grouprecognition.”82IthasalsobeenarguedthatperhapstheyfeltsomeconnectiontoelementsofAfricanculturethathadbeensuppressedandcondemnedforsolongbutweresuddenlyvisibleonstage,albeit in racist,exaggerated form.83Undeniably, though,onemajordrawforblack audienceswas simply seeing fellowAfricanAmericans on stage. Blackminstrels were largelyviewedascelebrities,earningmoremoneyandachievingmore fame thanAfricanAmericanseverhadbefore.84 Black minstrelsy was the first large-scale opportunity for African Americans to enter showbusiness.Tosomedegree,then,blackminstrelsy—asdegradingasitwas—representedsuccess.Itseemslikelythathistorianswillonedaylookbackontheimagesofblackmeningangstarapvideos

with a similar curiosity.Whywould these youngmen,who are targets of a brutal drugwar declaredagainst them, put on a show—a spectacle—that romanticizes and glorifies their criminalization?Whywouldtheseyoungmenopenlyendorseandperpetuatetheverystereotypesthatareinvokedtojustifytheirsecond-classstatus, theirexclusionfrommainstreamsociety?Theanswers,historiansmayfind,arenotthatdifferentfromtheanswerstotheminstrelsypuzzle.Itisimportanttokeepinmind,though,thatmanyhip-hopartiststodaydonotembraceandperpetuate

the worst racial stereotypes associated with mass incarceration. Artists like Common, for example,articulateasharpcritiqueofAmericanpoliticsandcultureandrejectthemisogynyandviolencepreached

bygangsta rappers.Andwhile rap isoften associatedwith “gangsta life” in themainstreampress, theoriginsofrapandhip-hopculturearenotrootedinoutlawideology.Whenrapwasborn,theearlyrapstarswere not rapping about gangsta life, but “MyAdidas” and good times in the ’hood in tunes like“Rapper’sDelight.”Rapmusicchangedafter theWaronDrugsshifted intohighgearand thousandsofyoung,blackmenwere suddenly sweptoff the streetsand intoprisons.Violence inurbancommunitiesflared in those communities, not simply because of the new drug—crack—but because of themassivecrackdown,whichradicallyreshapedthetraditionallifecourseforyoungblackmen.Asatidalwaveofpunitiveness,stigma,anddespairwashedoverpoorcommunitiesofcolor,thosewhoweredemonized—notonlyinthemainstreampressbutoftenintheirowncommunities—didwhatallstigmatizedgroupsdo:they struggled to preserve a positive identity by embracing their stigma. Gangsta rap—while it mayamounttolittlemorethanaminstrelshowwhenitappearsonMTVtoday—hasitsrootsinthestruggleforapositiveidentityamongoutcasts.

TheAntidote

ItisdifficulttolookatpicturesofblackpeopleperforminginminstrelshowsduringtheJimCrowera.Itisalmostbeyondbeliefthatatonetimeblackpeopleactuallycoveredtheirfaceswithpitch-blackpaint,coveredtheirmouthswithwhitepaintdrawninanexaggerated,clownishsmile,andprancedonstagefortheentertainmentanddelightofwhiteaudiences,whowere tickledbythesightofablackmanhappilyportraying the worst racial stereotypes that justified slavery and later Jim Crow. The images are sopainfultheycancauseadownrightvisceralreaction.Thedamagedonebytheminstrel’scomplicityintheJimCrowregimewasconsiderable.Evenso,dowehatetheminstrel?Dowedespisehim?Ordowedounderstandhimasanunfortunateexpressionofthetimes?Mostpeopleofanyracewouldprobablycondemntheminstrelshowbutstopshortofcondemningthe

minstrel as a man. Pity, more than contempt, seems the likely response. Why? With the benefit ofhindsight,wecanseetheminstrelinhissocialcontext.Byshuckin’andjivin’forwhiteaudiences,hewasmirroringtowhiteaudiencestheshameandcontemptprojectedontohim.Hemighthavemadeadecentliving that way—may even have been treated as a celebrity—but from a distance, we can see theemptiness,thepain.Whenthesystemofmassincarcerationcollapses(andifhistoryisanyguide,itwill),historianswill

undoubtedlylookbackandmarvelthatsuchanextraordinarilycomprehensivesystemofracializedsocialcontrol existed in theUnitedStates.How fascinating, theywill likely say, that adrugwarwaswagedalmostexclusivelyagainstpoorpeopleofcolor—peoplealreadytrappedinghettosthatlackedjobsanddecentschools.Theywereroundedupbythemillions,packedawayinprisons,andwhenreleased,theywere stigmatized for life,denied the right tovote, andushered intoaworldofdiscrimination.Legallybarredfromemployment,housing,andwelfarebenefits—andsaddledwiththousandsofdollarsofdebt—thesepeoplewereshamedandcondemnedforfailingtoholdtogethertheirfamilies.Theywerechastisedfor succumbing todepression andanger, andblamed for landingback inprison.Historianswill likelywonderhowwecoulddescribethenewcastesystemasasystemofcrimecontrol,whenitisdifficulttoimagineasystembetterdesignedtocreate—ratherthanprevent—crime.Noneofthisistosuggestthatthosewhobreakthelawbearnoresponsibilityfortheirconductorexist

merelyas“productsoftheirenvironment.”Todenytheindividualagencyofthosecaughtupinthesystem—theircapacitytoovercomeseeminglyimpossibleodds—wouldbetodenyanessentialelementoftheirhumanity.We, ashumanbeings, arenot simplyorganismsor animals responding to stimuli.Wehaveahigherself,acapacityfortranscendence.Yetourabilitytoexercisefreewillandtranscendthemostextraordinaryobstaclesdoesnotmakethe

conditionsofourlifeirrelevant.Mostofusstruggleandoftenfailtomeetthebiggestchallengesofourlives.Eventhesmallerchallenges—breakingabadhabitorstickingtoadiet—oftenprovetoodifficult,evenforthoseofuswhoarerelativelyprivilegedandcomfortableinourdailylives.Infact,whatismostremarkableaboutthehundredsofthousandsofpeoplewhoreturnfromprisonto

theircommunitieseachyearisnothowmanyfail,buthowmanysomehowmanagetosurviveandstayoutofprisonagainstalltheodds.Consideringthedesignofthisnewsystemofcontrol,itisastonishingthatso many people labeled criminals still manage to care for and feed their children, hold togethermarriages, obtain employment, and start businesses.Perhapsmost heroic are thosewho, upon release,launch social justice organizations that challenge the discrimination ex-offenders face and providedesperatelyneededsupportforthosenewlyreleasedfromprison.Theseheroesgolargelyunnoticedbypoliticianswhoprefertoblamethosewhofail,ratherthanpraisewithadmirationandaweallthosewhosomehowmanage,despiteseeminglyinsurmountablehurdles,tosurvive.Asasociety,ourdecision toheapshameandcontemptuponthosewhostruggleandfail inasystem

designedtokeepthemlockedupandlockedoutsaysfarmoreaboutourselvesthanitdoesaboutthem.Thereisanotherpath.Ratherthanshamingandcondemninganalreadydeeplystigmatizedgroup,we,

collectively,canembracethem—notnecessarilytheirbehavior,butthem—theirhumanness.Asthesayinggoes,“Yougottahatethecrime,butlovethecriminal.”Thisisnotamereplatitude;itisaprescriptionforliberation. Ifwehadactually learned to show love, care, compassion, andconcernacross racial linesduringtheCivilRightsMovement—ratherthangocolorblind—massincarcerationwouldnotexisttoday.

5

TheNewJimCrow

ItwasnoordinarySundaymorningwhenpresidentialcandidateBarackObamasteppedtothepodiumatthe Apostolic Church of God in Chicago. It was Father’s Day. Hundreds of enthusiastic congregantspacked the pews at the overwhelmingly black church eager to hear what the first black DemocraticnomineeforpresidentoftheUnitedStateshadtosay.Themessagewasafamiliarone:blackmenshouldbebetterfathers.Toomanyareabsentfromtheir

homes.For those in theaudience,Obama’sspeechwasanold tunesungbyanexcitingnewperformer.Hismessageofpersonalresponsibility,particularlyasitrelatestofatherhood,wasanythingbutnew;ithadbeendeliveredcountlesstimesbyblackministersinchurchesacrossAmerica.ThemessagehadalsobeendeliveredonanationalstagebycelebritiessuchasBillCosbyandSidneyPoitier.AndthemessagehadbeendeliveredwithgreatpassionbyLouisFarrakhan,whomore thanadecadeearlier summonedonemillionblackmentoWashington,D.C.,foradayof“atonement”andrecommitmenttotheirfamiliesandcommunities.Themainstreammedia,however,treatedtheeventasbignews,andmanypunditsseemedsurprisedthat

the black congregants actually applauded themessage. For them, it was remarkable that black peoplenoddedinapprovalwhenObamasaid:“Ifwearehonestwithourselves,we’lladmitthattoomanyfathersaremissing—missing from toomany livesand toomanyhomes.Toomany fathersareMIA.ToomanyfathersareAWOL.Theyhaveabandonedtheirresponsibilities.They’reactinglikeboysinsteadofmen.Andthefoundationsofourfamiliesareweakerbecauseofit.YouandIknowthisistrueeverywhere,butnowhereisthismoretruethanintheAfricanAmericancommunity.”Themediadidnotask—andObamadidnottell—wherethemissingfathersmightbefound.Thefollowingday,socialcriticandsociologistMichaelEricDysonpublishedacritiqueofObama’s

speechinTimemagazine.Hepointedoutthatthestereotypeofblackmenbeingpoorfathersmaywellbefalse.ResearchbyBostonCollegesocialpsychologistRebekahLevineColeyfoundthatblackfathersnotlivingathomearemore likely tokeep incontactwith theirchildren thanfathersofanyotherethnicorracial group.Dyson chidedObama for evoking a black stereotype for political gain, pointing out that“Obama’swordsmayhavebeenspoken toblack folk,but theywereaimedat thosewhitesstillon thefenceaboutwhomtosend to theWhiteHouse.”1Dyson’scritiquewasa fairone,but likeothermediacommentators,heremainedsilentaboutwherealltheabsentblackfatherscouldbefound.Heidentifiednumeroussocialproblemsplaguingblackfamilies,suchashighlevelsofunemployment,discriminatorymortgage practices, and the gutting of early-childhood learning programs.Not awordwas said aboutprisons.Thepublicdiscourseregarding“missingblackfathers”closelyparallelsthedebateaboutthelackof

eligibleblackmenformarriage.Themajorityofblackwomenareunmarriedtoday,including70percentofprofessionalblackwomen.2“Wherehavealltheblackmengone?”isacommonrefrainheardamongblackwomenfrustratedintheireffortstofindlifepartners.Thesense thatblackmenhavedisappeared is rooted in reality.TheU.S.CensusBureaureported in

2002thattherearenearly3millionmoreblackadultwomenthanmeninblackcommunitiesacrosstheUnitedStates,agendergapof26percent.3Inmanyurbanareas,thegapisfarworse,risingtomorethan37percentinplaceslikeNewYorkCity.ThecomparabledisparityforwhitesintheUnitedStatesis8

percent.4Althoughamillionblackmencanbefoundinprisonsandjails,publicacknowledgementoftheroleof the criminal justice system in “disappearing”blackmen is surprisingly rare.Even in theblackmedia—whichisgenerallymorewillingtoraiseandtackleissuesrelatedtocriminaljustice—aneeriesilencecanoftenbefound.5Ebonymagazine,forexample,rananarticleinDecember2006entitled“WhereHavetheBlackMen

Gone?”The author posed thepopular questionbut never answered it.6He suggestedwewill findourblackmenwhenwerediscoverGod,family,andself-respect.AmorecynicalapproachwastakenbyTyraBanks,thepopulartalkshowhost,whodevotedashowinMay2008totherecurringquestion,“WhereHaveAll theGoodBlackMenGone?”Shewondered aloudwhether blackwomen are unable to find“goodblackmen”becausetoomanyofthemaregayordatingwhitewomen.NomentionwasmadeoftheWaronDrugsormassincarceration.ThefactthatBarackObamacangiveaspeechonFather’sDaydedicatedtothesubjectoffatherswho

are“AWOL”withouteveracknowledgingthatthemajorityofyoungblackmeninlargeurbanareasarecurrently under the control of the criminal justice system is disturbing, to say the least.What ismoreproblematic,though,isthathardlyanyoneinthemainstreammedianoticedtheoversight.OnemightnotexpectseriousanalysisfromTyraBanks,butshouldn’tweexpectabitmorefromtheNewYorkTimesandCNN?Hundredsofthousandsofblackmenareunabletobegoodfathersfortheirchildren,notbecauseofalackofcommitmentordesirebutbecausetheyarewarehousedinprisons,lockedincages.Theydidnotwalkoutontheirfamiliesvoluntarily;theyweretakenawayinhandcuffs,oftenduetoamassivefederalprogramknownastheWaronDrugs.More African Americans are under correctional control today—in prison or jail, on probation or

parole—thanwereenslavedin1850,adecadebefore theCivilWarbegan.7Themass incarcerationofpeopleofcolorisabigpartofthereasonthatablackchildborntodayislesslikelytoberaisedbybothparents than a black child born during slavery.8 The absence of black fathers from families acrossAmerica is not simply a function of laziness, immaturity, or too much time watching Sports Center.Thousandsofblackmenhavedisappeared intoprisonsand jails, lockedawayfordrugcrimes thatarelargelyignoredwhencommittedbywhites.TheclockhasbeenturnedbackonracialprogressinAmerica,thoughscarcelyanyoneseemstonotice.

AlleyesarefixedonpeoplelikeBarackObamaandOprahWinfrey,whohavedefiedtheoddsandrisentopower,fame,andfortune.Forthoseleftbehind,especiallythosewithinprisonwalls,thecelebrationofracialtriumphinAmericamustseematadpremature.Moreblackmenareimprisonedtodaythanatanyothermomentinournation’shistory.Morearedisenfranchisedtodaythanin1870,theyeartheFifteenthAmendmentwasratifiedprohibitinglawsthatexplicitlydenytherighttovoteonthebasisofrace.9Youngblackmen todaymaybe justas likely tosufferdiscrimination inemployment,housing,publicbenefits,andjuryserviceasablackmanintheJimCrowera—discriminationthatisperfectlylegal,becauseitisbasedonone’scriminalrecord.Thisisthenewnormal,thenewracialequilibrium.The launching of the War on Drugs and the initial construction of the new system required the

expenditureof tremendouspolitical initiativeandresources.Mediacampaignswerewaged;politiciansblasted“soft”judgesandenactedharshsentencinglaws;poorpeopleofcolorwerevilified.Thesystemnow,however,requiresverylittlemaintenanceorjustification.Infact,ifyouarewhiteandmiddleclass,youmightnotevenrealizethedrugwarisstillgoingon.Mosthighschoolandcollegestudentstodayhavenorecollectionofthepoliticalandmediafrenzysurroundingthedrugwarintheearlyyears.Theywereyoungchildrenwhenthewarwasdeclared,ornotevenbornyet.Crackisout;terrorismisin.Today, the political fanfare and the vehement, racialized rhetoric regarding crime and drugs are no

longer necessary. Mass incarceration has been normalized, and all of the racial stereotypes and

assumptions that gave rise to the system are now embraced (or at least internalized) by people of allcolors,fromallwalksoflife,andineverymajorpoliticalparty.Wemaywonderaloud“wherehavetheblackmen gone?” but deep downwe already know. It is simply taken for granted that, in cities likeBaltimore and Chicago, the vast majority of young black men are currently under the control of thecriminaljusticesystemorbrandedcriminalsforlife.Thisextraordinarycircumstance—unheardofintherestoftheworld—istreatedhereinAmericaasabasicfactoflife,asnormalasseparatewaterfountainswerejustahalfcenturyago.

StatesofDenial

Theclaimthatwereallyknowwherealltheblackmenhavegonemayinspireconsiderabledoubt.Ifweknow,whydowefeignignorance?Coulditbethatmostpeoplereallydon’tknow?Isitpossiblethattheroundup, lockdown, and exclusion of blackmen enmasse from the body politic has occurred largelyunnoticed?Theanswerisyesandno.Much has been written about the ways in which people manage to deny, even to themselves, that

extraordinary atrocities, racial oppression, and other forms of human suffering have occurred or areoccurring.CriminologistStanleyCohenwroteperhapsthemostimportantbookonthesubject,StatesofDenial. The book examines how individuals and institutions—victims, perpetrators, and bystanders—knowaboutyetdeny theoccurrenceofoppressiveacts.Theyseeonlywhat theywant toseeandwearblinderstoavoidseeingtherest.Thishasbeentrueaboutslavery,genocide,torture,andeveryformofsystemicoppression.Cohenemphasizesthatdenial,thoughdeplorable,iscomplicated.Itisnotsimplyamatterofrefusingto

acknowledge an obvious, though uncomfortable, truth.Many people “know” and “not-know” the truthabouthumansufferingatthesametime.Inhiswords,“Denialmaybeneitheramatteroftellingthetruthnorintentionallytellingalie.Thereseemtobestatesofmind,orevenwholecultures,inwhichweknowanddon’tknowatthesametime.”10Today,mostAmericansknowanddon’tknowthetruthaboutmassincarceration.Formorethanthree

decades,imagesofblackmeninhandcuffshavebeenaregularstapleoftheeveningnews.Weknowthatlargenumbersofblackmenhavebeenlockedincages.Infact,itispreciselybecauseweknowthatblackandbrownpeople are farmore likely tobe imprisoned thatwe, as anation, havenot cared toomuchaboutit.Wetellourselvesthey“deserve”theirfate,eventhoughweknow—anddon’tknow—thatwhitesare just as likely to commitmany crimes, especially drug crimes.Weknow that people released fromprison face a lifetime of discrimination, scorn, and exclusion, and yet we claim not to know that anundercasteexists.Weknowandwedon’tknowatthesametime.Upon reflection, it is relatively easy to understand howAmericans come to deny the evils ofmass

incarceration.Denial is facilitatedbypersistent racial segregation inhousingand schools,bypoliticaldemagoguery,byracializedmediaimagery,andbytheeaseofchangingone’sperceptionofrealitysimplybychangingtelevisionchannels.Thereislittlereasontodoubttheprevailing“commonsense”thatblackandbrownmenhavebeenlockedupenmassemerelyinresponsetocrimerateswhenone’ssourcesofinformationaremainstreammediaoutlets.Inmanyrespects,therealityofmassincarcerationiseasiertoavoidknowingthantheinjusticesandsufferingsassociatedwithslaveryorJimCrow.Thoseconfinedtoprisons are out of sight and out of mind; once released, they are typically confined in ghettos. MostAmericansonlycometo“know”aboutthepeoplecyclinginandoutofprisonsthroughfictionalpolicedramas,musicvideos,gangstarap,and“true”accountsofghettoexperienceontheeveningnews.Theseracializednarrativestendtoconfirmandreinforcetheprevailingpublicconsensusthatweneednotcareabout“thosepeople”;theydeservewhattheyget.Of all the reasons thatwe fail toknow the truth aboutmass incarceration, though, one standsout: a

profoundmisunderstandingregardinghowracialoppressionactuallyworks.IfsomeoneweretovisittheUnitedStatesfromanothercountry(oranotherplanet)andask:IstheU.S.criminaljusticesystemsomekindoftoolofracialcontrol?MostAmericanswouldswiftlydenyit.Numerousreasonswouldleaptomindwhythatcouldnotpossiblybethecase.Thevisitorwouldbetoldthatcrimerates,blackculture,orbadschoolsweretoblame.“Thesystemisnotrunbyabunchofracists,”theapologistwouldexplain.“It’s run by peoplewho are trying to fight crime.” That response is predictable becausemost peopleassumethatracism,andracialsystemsgenerally,arefundamentallyafunctionofattitudes.Becausemass

incarcerationisofficiallycolorblind, itseemsinconceivable that thesystemcouldfunctionmuchlikearacialcastesystem.Thewidespreadandmistakenbeliefthatracialanimusisnecessaryforthecreationandmaintenanceofracializedsystemsofsocialcontrolisthemostimportantreasonthatwe,asanation,haveremainedindeepdenial.Themisunderstandingisnotsurprising.Asasociety,ourcollectiveunderstandingofracismhasbeen

powerfullyinfluencedbytheshockingimagesoftheJimCroweraandthestruggleforcivilrights.WhenwethinkofracismwethinkofGovernorWallaceofAlabamablockingtheschoolhousedoor;wethinkofwaterhoses,lynchings,racialepithets,and“whitesonly”signs.Theseimagesmakeiteasytoforgetthatmanywonderful,good-heartedwhitepeoplewhoweregeneroustoothers,respectfuloftheirneighbors,and even kind to their blackmaids, gardeners, or shoe shiners—andwished themwell—neverthelesswenttothepollsandvotedforracialsegregation.ManywhiteswhosupportedJimCrowjustifieditonpaternalistgrounds,actuallybelievingtheyweredoingblacksafavororbelievingthetimewasnotyet“right”forequality.ThedisturbingimagesfromtheJimCroweraalsomakeiteasytoforgetthatmanyAfricanAmericanswere complicit in the JimCrow system, profiting from it directly or indirectly orkeepingtheirobjectionsquietoutoffearoftherepercussions.Ourunderstandingofracismisthereforeshaped by the most extreme expressions of individual bigotry, not by the way in which it functionsnaturally, almost invisibly (and sometimes with genuinely benign intent), when it is embedded in thestructureofasocialsystem.Theunfortunaterealitywemustfaceisthatracismmanifestsitselfnotonlyinindividualattitudesand

stereotypes,butalso in thebasic structureof society.Academicshavedevelopedcomplicated theoriesandobscurejargoninanefforttodescribewhatisnowreferredtoasstructuralracism,yettheconceptis fairly straightforward. One theorist, Iris Marion Young, relying on a famous “birdcage” metaphor,explainsit thisway:Ifonethinksaboutracismbyexaminingonlyonewireofthecage,oroneformofdisadvantage,itisdifficulttounderstandhowandwhythebirdistrapped.Onlyalargenumberofwiresarrangedinaspecificway,andconnectedtooneanother,servetoenclosethebirdandtoensurethatitcannotescape.11What isparticularly important tokeep inmind is thatanygivenwireof thecagemayormaynotbe

specificallydevelopedfor thepurposeof trappingthebird,yet itstilloperates(togetherwiththeotherwires) torestrict its freedom.Bythesametoken,noteveryaspectofaracialcastesystemneeds tobedevelopedfor thespecificpurposeofcontrollingblackpeople inorderfor it tooperate(togetherwithother laws, institutions,andpractices) to trap themat thebottomofaracialhierarchy. In thesystemofmass incarceration,awidevarietyof laws, institutions,andpractices—rangingfromracialprofilingtobiasedsentencingpolicies,politicaldisenfranchisement,andlegalizedemploymentdiscrimination—trapAfricanAmericansinavirtual(andliteral)cage.Fortunately,asMarilynFryehasnoted,everybirdcagehasadoor,andeverybirdcagecanbebroken

andcancorrode.12What ismostconcerningabout thenewracialcaste system,however, is that itmayprovetobemoredurablethanitspredecessors.Becausethisnewsystemisnotexplicitlybasedonrace,it is easier to defend on seemingly neutral grounds. And while all previous methods of control haveblamedthevictiminonewayoranother,thecurrentsysteminvitesobserverstoimaginethatthosewhoare trapped in thesystemwerefree toavoidsecond-classstatusorpermanentbanishmentfromsocietysimplybychoosingnot tocommitcrimes. It is farmoreconvenient to imagine thatamajorityofyoungAfricanAmericanmeninurbanareasfreelychosealifeofcrimethantoaccepttherealpossibilitythattheir liveswere structured in away that virtually guaranteed their early admission into a system fromwhichtheycanneverescape.Mostpeoplearewillingtoacknowledgetheexistenceofthecagebutinsistthatadoorhasbeenleftopen.Onewayofunderstandingourcurrentsystemofmassincarcerationistothinkofitasabirdcagewitha

lockeddoor. It isasetofstructuralarrangements that locksaraciallydistinctgroupintoasubordinate

political, social, and economicposition, effectively creating a second-class citizenship.Those trappedwithinthesystemarenotmerelydisadvantaged,inthesensethattheyarecompetingonanunequalplayingfieldorfaceadditionalhurdlestopoliticaloreconomicsuccess;rather,thesystemitselfisstructuredtolockthemintoasubordinateposition.

HowItWorks

PreciselyhowthesystemofmassincarcerationworkstotrapAfricanAmericansinavirtual(andliteral)cagecanbestbeunderstoodbyviewingthesystemasawhole.Inearlierchapters,weconsideredvariouswiresofthecageinisolation;here,weputthepiecestogether,stepback,andviewthecageinitsentirety.OnlywhenweviewthecagefromadistancecanwedisengagefromthemazeofrationalizationsthatareofferedforeachwireandseehowtheentireapparatusoperatestokeepAfricanAmericansperpetuallytrapped.This,inbrief,ishowthesystemworks:TheWaronDrugsisthevehiclethroughwhichextraordinary

numbersofblackmenare forced into thecage.Theentrapmentoccurs in threedistinctphases,eachofwhichhasbeenexploredearlier,butabrief review isusefulhere.The first stage is the roundup.Vastnumbersofpeoplearesweptintothecriminaljusticesystembythepolice,whoconductdrugoperationsprimarily in poor communities of color.They are rewarded in cash—throughdrug forfeiture laws andfederalgrantprograms—forroundingupasmanypeopleaspossible,andtheyoperateunconstrainedbyconstitutional rulesofprocedure thatoncewereconsidered inviolate.Policecan stop, interrogate, andsearch anyone they choose for drug investigations, provided they get “consent.” Because there is nomeaningfulcheckontheexerciseofpolicediscretion,racialbiasesaregrantedfreereign.Infact,policeareallowedtorelyonraceasafactorinselectingwhomtostopandsearch(eventhoughpeopleofcolorarenomorelikelytobeguiltyofdrugcrimesthanwhites)—effectivelyguaranteeingthatthosewhoaresweptintothesystemareprimarilyblackandbrown.Theconvictionmarksthebeginningofthesecondphase:theperiodofformalcontrol.Oncearrested,

defendants are generally deniedmeaningful legal representation and pressured to plead guiltywhetherthey are or not. Prosecutors are free to “load up” defendants with extra charges, and their decisionscannotbechallengedforracialbias.Onceconvicted,duetothedrugwar’sharshsentencinglaws,drugoffendersintheUnitedStatesspendmoretimeunderthecriminaljusticesystem’sformalcontrol—injailorprison,onprobationorparole—thandrugoffendersanywhereelseintheworld.Whileunderformalcontrol, virtually every aspectofone’s life is regulated andmonitoredby the system, and any formofresistanceordisobedienceissubjecttoswiftsanction.Thisperiodofcontrolmaylastalifetime,evenforthose convicted of extremelyminor, nonviolent offenses, but the vastmajority of those swept into thesystemareeventually released.Theyare transferred from theirprisoncells toamuch larger, invisiblecage.Thefinalstagehasbeendubbedbysomeadvocatesastheperiodofinvisiblepunishment.13Thisterm,

firstcoinedbyJeremyTravis,ismeanttodescribetheuniquesetofcriminalsanctionsthatareimposedonindividualsaftertheystepoutsidetheprisongates,aformofpunishmentthatoperateslargelyoutsideofpublicviewandtakeseffectoutsidethetraditionalsentencingframework.Thesesanctionsareimposedbyoperationoflawratherthandecisionsofasentencingjudge,yettheyoftenhaveagreaterimpactonone’s life course than the months or years one actually spends behind bars. These laws operatecollectivelytoensurethatthevastmajorityofconvictedoffenderswillneverintegrateintomainstream,whitesociety.Theywillbediscriminatedagainst,legally,fortherestoftheirlives—deniedemployment,housing,education,andpublicbenefits.Unabletosurmounttheseobstacles,mostwilleventuallyreturntoprisonandthenbereleasedagain,caughtinaclosedcircuitofperpetualmarginality.Inrecentyears,advocatesandpoliticianshavecalledforgreaterresourcesdevotedtotheproblemof

“prisoner reentry,” inviewof theunprecedentednumbersofpeoplewhoare released fromprisonandreturned to their communities every year.While the terminology iswell intentioned, it utterly fails toconveythegravityofthesituationfacingprisonersupontheirrelease.Peoplewhohavebeenconvictedoffeloniesalmostnevertrulyreenterthesocietytheyinhabitedpriortotheirconviction.Instead,theyentera

separatesociety,aworldhiddenfrompublicview,governedbyasetofoppressiveanddiscriminatoryrulesandlawsthatdonotapplytoeveryoneelse.Theybecomemembersofanundercaste—anenormouspopulation of predominately black and brown peoplewho, because of the drugwar, are denied basicrightsandprivilegesofAmericancitizenshipandarepermanentlyrelegatedtoaninferiorstatus.Thisisthefinalphase,andthereisnogoingback.

NothingNew?

Somemightarguethatasdisturbingasthissystemappearstobe,thereisnothingparticularlynewaboutmassincarceration;itismerelyacontinuationofpastdrugwarsandbiasedlawenforcementpractices.Racialbiasinourcriminaljusticesystemissimplyanoldproblemthathasgottenworse,andthesocialexcommunicationof“criminals”hasalonghistory;itisnotarecentinvention.Thereissomemerittothisargument.Racehasalways influenced theadministrationof justice in theUnitedStates.Since theday the first

prisonopened,peopleofcolorhavebeendisproportionately representedbehindbars. In fact, theveryfirstpersonadmittedtoaU.S.penitentiarywasa“lightskinnedNegroinexcellenthealth,”describedbyanobserveras“onewhowasbornofadegradedanddepressedrace,andhadneverexperiencedanythingbut indifference and harshness.”14 Biased police practices are also nothing new, a recurring theme ofAfricanAmericanexperiencesinceblacksweretargetedbythepoliceassuspectedrunawayslaves.AndeverydrugwarthathaseverbeenwagedintheUnitedStates—includingalcoholprohibition—hasbeentainted or driven by racial bias.15 Even postconviction penalties have a long history. The Americancoloniespassedlawsbarringcriminaloffendersfromawidevarietyofjobsandbenefits,automaticallydissolvingtheirmarriagesanddenyingthemtherighttoentercontracts.Theselegislatureswerefollowinga long tradition,datingback toancientGreece,of treatingcriminalsas less thanfullcitizens.Althoughmany collateral sanctionswere repealed by the late 1970s, arguably the drugwar simply revived andexpandedatraditionthathasancientroots,atraditionindependentofthelegacyofAmericanslavery.In view of this history and considering the lack of originality in many of the tactics and practices

employedintheeraofmassincarceration,thereisgoodreasontobelievethatthelatestdrugwarisjustanotherdrugwarcorruptedbyracialandethnicbias.Butthisviewiscorrectonlytoapoint.Inthepast,thecriminaljusticesystem,aspunitiveasitmayhavebeenduringvariouswarsoncrime

and drugs, affected only a relatively small percentage of the population. Because civil penalties andsanctionsimposedonex-offendersappliedonlytoafew,theyneveroperatedasacomprehensivesystemof control over any racially or ethnically defined population. Racial minorities were alwaysoverrepresentedamongcurrentandex-offenders,butassociologistshavenoted,untilthemid-1980s,thecriminal justice system was marginal to communities of color. While young minority men with littleschoolinghavealwayshadrelativelyhighratesofincarceration,“beforethe1980sthepenalsystemwasnotadominantpresenceinthedisadvantagedneighborhoods.”16Today,theWaronDrugshasgivenbirthtoasystemofmassincarcerationthatgovernsnotjustasmall

fraction of a racial or ethnic minority but entire communities of color. In ghetto communities, nearlyeveryoneiseitherdirectlyorindirectlysubjecttothenewcastesystem.Thesystemservestoredefinetheterms of the relationship of poor people of color and their communities tomainstream,white society,ensuringtheirsubordinateandmarginalstatus.Thecriminalandcivilsanctionsthatwereoncereservedforatinyminorityarenowusedtocontrolandoppressaraciallydefinedmajorityinmanycommunities,and the systematicmanner inwhich the control is achieved reflects not just a difference in scale.Thenatureofthecriminaljusticesystemhaschanged.Itisnolongerconcernedprimarilywiththepreventionandpunishmentofcrime,butratherwiththemanagementandcontrolofthedispossessed.Priordrugwarswereancillarytotheprevailingcastesystem.Thistimethedrugwaristhesystemofcontrol.Ifyoudoubtthatthisisthecase,considertheeffectofthewarontheground,inspecificlocales.Take

Chicago, Illinois, forexample.Chicago iswidelyconsidered tobeoneofAmerica’smostdiverseandvibrant cities. It has boasted blackmayors, black police chiefs, black legislators, and is home to thenation’s firstblackpresident. Ithasa thrivingeconomy,agrowingLatinocommunity,andasubstantialblackmiddleclass.YetastheChicagoUrbanLeaguereportedin2002,thereisanotherstorytobetold.17

IfMartinLutherKingJr.were to returnmiraculously toChicago,somefortyyearsafterbringinghisFreedomMovement to the city, he would be saddened to discover that the same issues on which heoriginally focused still produce stark patterns of racial inequality, segregation, and poverty.Hewouldalso be struck by the dramatically elevated significance of one particular institutional force in theperpetuationanddeepeningofthosepatterns:thecriminaljusticesystem.InthefewshortdecadessinceKing’sdeath,anewregimeofraciallydisparatemassincarcerationhasemergedinChicagoandbecometheprimarymechanismforracialoppressionandthedenialofequalopportunity.InChicago,liketherestofthecountry,theWaronDrugsistheengineofmassincarceration,aswellas

the primary cause of gross racial disparities in the criminal justice system and in the ex-offenderpopulation. About 90 percent of those sentenced to prison for a drug offense in Illinois are AfricanAmerican.18Whitedrugoffendersarerarelyarrested,andwhentheyare,theyaretreatedmorefavorablyat every stage of the criminal justice process, including plea bargaining and sentencing.19Whites areconsistentlymorelikelytoavoidprisonandfelonycharges,evenwhentheyarerepeatoffenders.20Blackoffenders,bycontrast,areroutinelylabeledfelonsandreleasedintoapermanentracialundercaste.The totalpopulationofblackmales inChicagowitha felony record (includingbothcurrentandex-

felons)isequivalentto55percentoftheblackadultmalepopulationandanastonishing80percentoftheadult black male workforce in the Chicago area.21 This stunning development reflects the dramaticincreaseinthenumberandraceofthosesenttoprisonfordrugcrimes.FromtheChicagoregionalone,thenumberofthoseannuallysenttoprisonfordrugcrimesincreasedalmost2,000percent,from469in1985to8,755in2005.22WhenpeoplearereleasedfromIllinoisprisons,theyaregivenaslittleas$10in“gatemoney”anda

bus ticket toanywhere in theUnitedStates.Most return to impoverishedneighborhoods in theChicagoarea,bringingfewresourcesandbearingthestigmaoftheirprisonrecord.23InChicago,asinmostcitiesacrossthecountry,ex-offendersarebannedorseverelyrestrictedfromemploymentinalargenumberofprofessions, job categories, and fields by professional licensing statutes, rules, and practices thatdiscriminate against potential employees with felony records. According to a study conducted by theDePaul University College of Law in 2000, of the then ninety-eight occupations requiring licenses inIllinois, fifty-sevenplacedstipulationsand/or restrictionsonapplicantswithacriminal record.24 Evenwhen not barred by law from holding specific jobs, ex-offenders in Chicago find it extraordinarilydifficulttofindemployerswhowillhirethem,regardlessofthenatureoftheirconviction.Theyarealsoroutinely denied public housing and welfare benefits, and they find it increasingly difficult to obtaineducation, especiallynow that funding forpublic educationhasbeenhardhit, due to explodingprisonbudgets.The impactof thenewcaste system ismost tragically felt among theyoung. InChicago (as inother

citiesacrosstheUnitedStates),youngblackmenaremorelikelytogotoprisonthantocollege.25AsofJune2001,therewerenearly20,000moreblackmenintheIllinoisstateprisonsystemthanenrolledinthestate’spublicuniversities.26 In fact, thereweremoreblackmen in thestate’scorrectional facilitiesthat year just on drug charges than the total number of black men enrolled in undergraduate degreeprogramsinstateuniversities.27Toputthecrisisinevensharperfocus,considerthis:just992blackmenreceivedabachelor’sdegreefromIllinoisstateuniversitiesin1999,whileroughly7,000blackmenwerereleasedfromthestateprisonsystemthefollowingyearjustfordrugoffenses.28Theyoungmenwhogotoprisonratherthancollegefacealifetimeofcloseddoors,discrimination,andostracism.Theirplightisnotwhatwehearaboutontheeveningnews,however.Sadly,liketheracialcastesystemsthatprecededit,thesystemofmassincarcerationnowseemsnormalandnaturaltomost,aregrettablenecessity.

MappingtheParallels

ThosecyclinginandoutofIllinoisprisonstodayaremembersofAmerica’snewracialundercaste.TheUnitedStateshasalmostalwayshadaracialundercaste—agroupdefinedwhollyorlargelybyracethatispermanently lockedoutofmainstream,white societyby law, custom,andpractice.The reasonsandjustifications changeover time, as eachnewcaste system reflects and adapts to changes in the social,political,andeconomiccontext.Whatismoststrikingaboutthedesignofthecurrentcastesystem,though,ishowcloselyitresemblesitspredecessor.ThereareimportantdifferencesbetweenmassincarcerationandJimCrow,tobesure—manyofwhichwillbediscussedlater—butwhenwestepbackandviewthesystemasawhole,thereisaprofoundsenseofdéjàvu.Thereisafamiliarstigmaandshame.Thereisanelaboratesystemofcontrol,completewithpoliticaldisenfranchisementand legalizeddiscrimination ineverymajorrealmofeconomicandsociallife.Andthereistheproductionofracialmeaningandracialboundaries.Manyoftheseparallelshavebeendiscussedatsomelengthinearlierchapters;othershaveyettobe

explored. Listed below are several of the most obvious similarities between Jim Crow and massincarceration,followedbyadiscussionofafewparallelsthathavenotbeendiscussedsofar.Let’sbeginwiththehistoricalparallels.Historicalparallels.JimCrowandmassincarcerationhavesimilarpoliticalorigins.Asdescribedin

chapter 1, both caste systems were born, in part, due to a desire among white elites to exploit theresentments,vulnerabilities,andracialbiasesofpoorandworking-classwhitesforpoliticaloreconomicgain. Segregation lawswere proposed as part of a deliberate and strategic effort to deflect anger andhostility thathadbeenbrewingagainst thewhiteeliteaway from themand towardAfricanAmericans.Thebirthofmassincarcerationcanbetracedtoasimilarpoliticaldynamic.Conservativesinthe1970sand1980ssoughttoappealtotheracialbiasesandeconomicvulnerabilitiesofpoorandworking-classwhitesthroughraciallycodedrhetoriconcrimeandwelfare.Inbothcases,theracialopportunistsofferedfew, if any, economic reforms to address the legitimate economic anxieties of poor andworking-classwhites,proposinginsteadacrackdownontheracially-defined“others.”IntheearlyyearsofJimCrow,conservativewhiteelitescompetedwitheachotherbypassingevermorestringentandoppressiveJimCrowlegislation.Acenturylater,politiciansintheearlyyearsofthedrugwarcompetedwitheachotherto provewho could be tougher on crime by passing ever harsher drug laws—a thinly veiled effort toappealtopoorandworking-classwhiteswho,onceagain,provedtheywerewillingtoforegoeconomicandstructuralreforminexchangeforanapparentefforttoputblacksback“intheirplace.”29Legalizeddiscrimination. Themost obvious parallel between JimCrow andmass incarceration is

legalizeddiscrimination.DuringBlackHistoryMonth,AmericanscongratulatethemselvesforhavingputanendtodiscriminationagainstAfricanAmericansinemployment,housing,publicbenefits,andpublicaccommodations.Schoolchildrenwonderoutloudhowdiscriminationcouldeverhavebeenlegalinthisgreat land of ours. Rarely are they told that it is still legal.Many of the forms of discrimination thatrelegatedAfricanAmericanstoaninferiorcasteduringJimCrowcontinuetoapplytohugesegmentsoftheblackpopulationtoday—providedtheyarefirstlabeledfelons.Iftheyarebrandedfelonsbythetimetheyreachtheageof twenty-one(asmanyof themare), theyaresubject to legalizeddiscriminationfortheirentireadult lives.The formsofdiscrimination thatapply toex-drugoffenders,described insomedetail inchapter4,meanthat,onceprisonersarereleased, theyenteraparallelsocialuniverse—muchlikeJimCrow—inwhichdiscriminationinnearlyeveryaspectofsocial,political,andeconomiclifeisperfectlylegal.LargemajoritiesofblackmenincitiesacrosstheUnitedStatesareonceagainsubjecttolegalized discrimination effectively barring them from full integration into mainstream, white society.MassincarcerationhasnullifiedmanyofthegainsoftheCivilRightsMovement,puttingmillionsofblack

menbackinapositionreminiscentofJimCrow.Politicaldisenfranchisement.During theJimCrowera,AfricanAmericansweredenied theright to

votethroughpolltaxes,literacytests,grandfatherclauses,andfelondisenfranchisementlaws,eventhoughtheFifteenthAmendment to theU.S.Constitution specificallyprovides that “the rightof citizensof theUnitedStatestovoteshallnotbedenied...onaccountofrace,color,orpreviousconditionofservitude.”Formally race-neutral devices were adopted to achieve the goal of an all-white electorate withoutviolating the terms of the Fifteenth Amendment. The devices worked quite well. Because AfricanAmericanswerepoor,theyfrequentlycouldnotpaypolltaxes.Andbecausetheyhadbeendeniedaccesstoeducation,theycouldnotpassliteracytests.Grandfatherclausesallowedwhitestovoteeveniftheycouldn’tmeettherequirements,aslongastheirancestorshadbeenabletovote.Finally,becauseblackswere disproportionately charged with felonies—in fact, some crimes were specifically defined asfelonies with the goal of eliminating blacks from the electorate—felony disenfranchisement lawseffectivelysuppressedtheblackvoteaswell.30Following the collapse of Jim Crow, all of the race-neutral devices for excluding blacks from the

electoratewereeliminatedthroughlitigationorlegislation,exceptfelondisenfranchisementlaws.Somecourtshavefoundthattheselawshave“losttheirdiscriminatorytaint”becausetheyhavebeenamendedsincethecollapseofJimCrow;otherscourtshaveallowedthelawstostandbecauseovertracialbiasisabsentfromthelegislativerecord.31Thefailureofourlegalsystemtoeradicateallofthetacticsadoptedduring the Jim Crow era to suppress the black vote has major implications today. Felondisenfranchisement laws have been more effective in eliminating black voters in the age of massincarcerationthantheywereduringJimCrow.LessthantwodecadesaftertheWaronDrugsbegan,oneinsevenblackmennationallyhadlosttherighttovote,andasmanyasoneinfourinthosestateswiththehighestAfricanAmericandisenfranchisement rate.32These figuresmayunderstate the impact of felonydisenfranchisement,because theydonot take intoaccount themillionsofex-felonswhocannotvote instatesthatrequireex-felonstopayfinesorfeesbeforetheirvotingrightscanberestored—thenewpolltax.AslegalscholarPamelaKarlanhasobserved,“felonydisenfranchisementhasdecimatedthepotentialblackelectorate.”33Itisworthyofnote,however,thattheexclusionofblackvotersfrompollingboothsisnottheonlyway

inwhichblackpoliticalpowerhasbeensuppressed.Anotherdimensionofdisenfranchisementechoesnotso much Jim Crow as slavery. Under the usual-residence rule, the Census Bureau counts imprisonedindividuals as residents of the jurisdiction in which they are incarcerated. Because most new prisonconstruction occurs in predominately white, rural areas, white communities benefit from inflatedpopulation totals at the expense of the urban, overwhelmingly minority communities from which theprisonerscome.34Thishasenormousconsequencesfortheredistrictingprocess.Whiteruralcommunitiesthat house prisons wind up with more people in state legislatures representing them, while poorcommunitiesofcolorloserepresentativesbecauseitappearstheirpopulationhasdeclined.Thispolicyisdisturbinglyreminiscentofthethree-fifthsclauseintheoriginalConstitution,whichenhancedthepoliticalclout of slaveholding states by including 60 percent of slaves in the population base for calculatingCongressionalseatsandelectoralvotes,eventhoughtheycouldnotvote.Exclusion from juries. Another clear parallel between mass incarceration and Jim Crow is the

systematicexclusionofblacksfromjuries.OnehallmarkoftheJimCrowerawasall-whitejuriestryingblackdefendantsintheSouth.Althoughtheexclusionofjurorsonthebasisofracehasbeenillegalsince1880, as a practical matter, the removal of prospective black jurors through race-based peremptorystrikeswassanctionedbytheSupremeCourtuntil1985,whentheCourtruledinBatsonv.Kentuckythatracially biased strikes violate the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.35 Todaydefendantsfaceasituationhighlysimilartotheonetheyfacedacenturyago.Asdescribedinchapter3,a

formalprohibitionagainstrace-basedperemptorystrikesdoesexist;asapracticalmatter,however, theCourt has tolerated the systematic exclusion of blacks from juries by allowing lower courts to accept“silly” and even “superstitious” reasons for striking black jurors.36 To make matters worse, a largepercentageofblackmen (about30percent) areautomaticallyexcluded from jury servicebecause theyhave been labeled felons.37 The combined effect of race-based peremptory strikes and the automaticexclusionoffelonsfromjurieshasputblackdefendantsinafamiliarplace—inacourtroominshackles,facinganall-whitejury.Closingthecourthousedoors.TheparallelsbetweenmassincarcerationandJimCrowextendallthe

waytotheU.S.SupremeCourt.Overtheyears,theSupremeCourthasfollowedafairlyconsistentpatterninrespondingtoracialcastesystems,firstprotectingthemandthen,afterdramaticshiftsinthepoliticaland social climate, dismantling these systems of control and some of their vestiges. InDred Scott v.Sanford,theSupremeCourtimmunizedtheinstitutionofslaveryfromlegalchallengeonthegroundsthatAfricanAmericanswerenot citizens, and inPlessy v.Ferguson, theCourt established the doctrine of“separatebutequal”—alegalfictionthatprotectedtheJimCrowsystemfromjudicialscrutinyforracialbias.Currently,McCleskeyv.KempanditsprogenyservemuchthesamefunctionasDredScottandPlessy.

In McCleskey, the Supreme Court demonstrated that it is once again in protection mode—firmlycommitted to the prevailing system of control. As chapter 3 demonstrated, the Court has closed thecourthousedoors toclaimsofracialbiasateverystageof thecriminal justiceprocess, fromstopsandsearches to plea bargaining and sentencing.Mass incarceration is now off-limits to challenges on thegroundsofracialbias,muchasitspredecessorswereintheirtime.Thenewracialcastesystemoperatesunimpededby theFourteenthAmendment and federal civil rights legislation—lawsdesigned to toppleearliersystemsofcontrol.TheSupremeCourt’sfamousproclamationin1857—“[theblackman]hasnorightswhichthewhitemanisboundtorespect”—remainstruetoasignificantdegreetoday,solongastheblackmanhasbeenlabeledafelon.38Racialsegregation.Althoughtheparallelslistedaboveshouldbeenoughtogiveanyonepause,there

areanumberofother,lessobvious,similaritiesbetweenmassincarcerationandJimCrowthathavenotbeenexploredinearlierchapters.Thecreationandmaintenanceofracialsegregationisoneexample.Asweknow,JimCrowlawsmandatedresidentialsegregation,andblackswererelegatedtotheworstpartsof town.Roads literallystoppedat theborderofmanyblackneighborhoods,shiftingfrompavement todirt.Water,sewersystems,andotherpublicservicesthatsupportedthewhiteareasoftownfrequentlydidnot extend to the black areas.The extreme poverty that plagued blacks due to their legally sanctionedinferiorstatuswaslargelyinvisibletowhites—solongaswhitesremainedintheirownneighborhoods,whichtheywereinclinedtodo.Racialsegregationrenderedblackexperiencelargelyinvisibletowhites,makingiteasierforwhitestomaintainracialstereotypesaboutblackvaluesandculture.Italsomadeiteasiertodenyorignoretheirsuffering.Mass incarceration functions similarly. It achieves racial segregation by segregating prisoners—the

majority of whom are black and brown—from mainstream society. Prisoners are kept behind bars,typicallymorethanahundredmilesfromhome.39Evenprisons—theactualbuildings—areararesightformanyAmericans,as theyareoften located far frompopulationcenters.Althoughruralcountiescontainonly20percentof theU.S.population,60percentofnewprisonconstructionoccurs there.40Prisonersare thus hidden from public view—out of sight, out of mind. In a sense, incarceration is a far moreextreme form of physical and residential segregation than Jim Crow segregation. Rather than merelyshuntingblackpeople to theother sideof townor corralling them inghettos,mass incarceration locksthem in cages. Bars and walls keep hundreds of thousands of black and brown people away frommainstreamsociety—aformofapartheidunlikeanytheworldhaseverseen.

Prisons, however, are not the only vehicle for racial segregation. Segregation is also created andperpetuatedbythefloodofprisonerswhoreturntoghettocommunitieseachyear.Becausethedrugwarhasbeenwagedalmostexclusivelyinpoorcommunitiesofcolor,whendrugoffendersarereleased,theyare generally returned to racially segregated ghetto communities—the places they call home. Inmanycities,thereentryphenomenonishighlyconcentratedinasmallnumberofneighborhoods.Accordingtoonestudy,duringatwelve-yearperiod,thenumberofprisonersreturninghometo“corecounties”—thosecounties thatcontain the innercityofametropolitanarea—tripled.41Theeffectsare felt throughout theUnited States. In interviews with one hundred residents of two Tallahassee, Florida, communities,researchersfoundthatnearlyeveryoneofthemhadexperiencedorexpectedtoexperiencethereturnofafamily member from prison.42 Similarly, a survey of families living in the Robert Taylor Homes inChicago found that themajority of residents either had a familymember in prison or expected one toreturnwithinthenexttwoyears.43Fully70percentofmenbetweentheagesofeighteenandforty-fiveintheimpoverishedandoverwhelminglyblackNorthLawndaleneighborhoodonChicago’sWestSideareex-offenders,saddledforlifewithacriminalrecord.44Themajority(60percent)wereincarceratedfordrugoffenses.45Theseneighborhoodsareaminefieldforparolees,forastandardconditionofparoleisapromise not to associatewith felons.As PaulaWolff, a senior executive atChicagoMetropolis 2020observes, in these ghetto neighborhoods, “It is hard for a parolee towalk to the corner store to get acartonofmilkwithoutbeingsubjecttoaparoleviolation.”46Bycontrast,whites—evenpoorwhites—are far less likely tobe imprisoned fordrugoffenses.And

when they are released from prison, they rarely find themselves in the ghetto. Thewhite poor have avastlydifferentexperienceinAmericathandopoorpeopleofcolor.Becausewhitesdonotsufferracialsegregation, thewhitepoorarenot relegated to raciallydefinedareasof intensepoverty. InNewYorkCity,one study found that70percentof thecity’spoorblackandLatino residents live inhigh-povertyneighborhoods, whereas 70 percent of the city’s poor whites live in nonpoverty neighborhoods—communities that have significant resources, including jobs, schools, banks, and grocery stores.47Nationwide, nearly seven out of eight people living in high-poverty urban areas are members of aminoritygroup.48Mass incarceration thus perpetuates and deepens pre-existing patterns of racial segregation and

isolation,notjustbyremovingpeopleofcolorfromsocietyandputtingtheminprisons,butbydumpingthem back into ghettos upon their release. Youth of color who might have escaped their ghettocommunities—orhelpedtotransformthem—iftheyhadbeengivenafairshotinlifeandnotbeenlabeledfelons, insteadfindthemselves trappedinaclosedcircuitofperpetualmarginality,circulatingbetweenghettoandprison.49Theraciallysegregated,poverty-strickenghettos thatexist in inner-citycommunitiesacrossAmerica

would not exist today but for racially biased government policies for which there has never beenmeaningful redress.50 Yet every year, hundreds of thousands of poor people of color who have beentargeted by the War on Drugs are forced to return to these racially segregated communities—neighborhoodsstillcrippledbythelegacyofanearliersystemofcontrol.Asapracticalmatter,theyhavenoother choice. In thisway,mass incarceration, like its predecessor JimCrow, creates andmaintainsracialsegregation.Symbolicproductionofrace.Arguably themost importantparallelbetweenmass incarcerationand

JimCrowisthatbothhaveservedtodefinethemeaningandsignificanceofraceinAmerica.Indeed,aprimaryfunctionofanyracialcastesystemistodefinethemeaningofraceinitstime.Slaverydefinedwhat itmeant to be black (a slave), and JimCrowdefinedwhat itmeant to be black (a second-classcitizen).TodaymassincarcerationdefinesthemeaningofblacknessinAmerica:blackpeople,especiallyblackmen,arecriminals.Thatiswhatitmeanstobeblack.

The temptation is to insist that blackmen “choose” to be criminals; the systemdoes notmake themcriminals,atleastnotinthewaythatslaverymadeblacksslavesorJimCrowmadethemsecond-classcitizens. The myth of choice here is seductive, but it should be resisted. African Americans are notsignificantly more likely to use or sell prohibited drugs than whites, but they aremade criminals atdrasticallyhigher rates forprecisely the sameconduct. In fact, studies suggest thatwhiteprofessionalsmaybethemostlikelyofanygrouptohaveengagedinillegaldrugactivityintheirlifetime,yettheyaretheleastlikelytobemadecriminals.51Theprevalenceofillegaldrugactivityamongallracialandethnicgroupscreatesasituation inwhich,due to limited lawenforcementresourcesandpoliticalconstraints,somepeoplearemadecriminalswhileothersarenot.BlackpeoplehavebeenmadecriminalsbytheWaronDrugstoadegreethatdwarfsitseffectonotherracialandethnicgroups,especiallywhites.Andtheprocessofmakingthemcriminalshasproducedracialstigma.Every racial caste system in theUnitedStateshasproduced racial stigma.Mass incarceration is no

exception.Racialstigmaisproducedbydefiningnegativelywhatitmeanstobeblack.Thestigmaofracewasonce theshameof theslave; then itwas theshameof thesecond-classcitizen; todaythestigmaofrace is theshameof thecriminal.Asdescribed inchapter4,manyex-offendersdescribeanexistentialangstassociatedwiththeirpariahstatus,anangstthatcastsashadowovereveryaspectoftheiridentityandsocialexperience.Theshameandstigmaisnotlimitedtotheindividual;itextendstofamilymembersandfriends—evenwholecommunitiesarestigmatizedbythepresenceofthoselabeledcriminals.Thosestigmatized often adopt coping strategiesAfricanAmericans once employed during the JimCrow era,including lying about their own criminal history or the status of their familymembers in an attempt to“pass”assomeonewhowillbewelcomedbymainstreamsociety.The critical point here is that, for black men, the stigma of being a “criminal” in the era of mass

incarcerationisfundamentallyaracialstigma.Thisisnottosaystigmaisabsentforwhitecriminals;itispresentandpowerful.Rather,thepointisthatthestigmaofcriminalityforwhiteoffendersisdifferent—itisanonracialstigma.Anexperimentmayhelptoillustratehowandwhythisisthecase.Saythefollowingtonearlyanyone

andwatchthereaction:“Wereallyneedtodosomethingabouttheproblemofwhitecrime.”Laughterisalikelyresponse.Thetermwhitecrimeisnonsensicalintheeraofmassincarceration,unlessoneisreallyreferring towhite-collar crime, inwhich case the term is understood tomean the types of crimes thatseeminglyrespectablewhitepeoplecommitinthecomfortoffancyoffices.Becausethetermwhitecrimelacks socialmeaning, the termwhite criminal is also perplexing. In that formulation,white seems toqualifythetermcriminal—asiftosay,“he’sacriminalbutnotthatkindofcriminal.”Or,he’snotarealcriminal—i.e.,notwhatwemeanbycriminaltoday.In theeraofmass incarceration,what itmeans tobeacriminal inour collectiveconsciousnesshas

becomeconflatedwithwhatitmeanstobeblack,sothetermwhitecriminal isconfounding,while thetermblackcriminalisnearlyredundant.Recallthestudydiscussedinchapter3thatrevealedthatwhensurveyrespondentswereasked topictureadrugcriminal,nearlyeveryonepicturedsomeonewhowasblack.Thisphenomenonhelpstoexplainwhystudiesindicatethatwhiteex-offendersmayactuallyhaveaneasier timegainingemployment thanAfricanAmericanswithoutacriminal record.52Tobe a blackmanistobethoughtofasacriminal,andtobeablackcriminalistobedespicable—asocialpariah.Tobeawhitecriminalisnoteasy,byanymeans,butasawhitecriminalyouarenotaracialoutcast,thoughyou may face many forms of social and economic exclusion. Whiteness mitigates crime, whereasblacknessdefinesthecriminal.Aswehaveseeninearlierchapters,theconflationofblacknesswithcrimedidnothappenorganically;

rather,itwasconstructedbypoliticalandmediaelitesaspartofthebroadprojectknownastheWaronDrugs.Thisconflationservedtoprovidealegitimateoutlettotheexpressionofantiblackresentmentandanimus—aconvenientreleasevalvenowthatexplicitformsofracialbiasarestrictlycondemned.Inthe

eraofcolorblindness,itisnolongerpermissibletohateblacks,butwecanhatecriminals.Indeed,weareencouraged to do so. As writer John EdgarWideman points out, “It’s respectable to tar and feathercriminals,toadvocatelockingthemupandthrowingawaythekey.It’snotracisttobeagainstcrime,eventhough the archetypal criminal in the media and the public imagination almost always wears WillieHorton’sface.”53Itispreciselybecauseourcriminaljusticesystemprovidesavehiclefortheexpressionofconscious

andunconsciousantiblacksentiment that theprison label isexperiencedasa racial stigma.Thestigmaexistswhetherornotonehasbeenformallybrandedacriminal,yetanotherparalleltoJimCrow.JustasAfricanAmericansintheNorthwerestigmatizedbytheJimCrowsystemeveniftheywerenotsubjecttoitsformalcontrol,blackmentodayarestigmatizedbymassincarceration—andthesocialconstructionofthe “criminalblackman”—whether they have ever been to prison or not. For those who have beenbranded,thebrandingservestointensifyanddeepentheracialstigma,astheyareconstantlyremindedinvirtuallyeverycontacttheyhavewithpublicagencies,aswellaswithprivateemployersandlandlords,thattheyarethenew“untouchables.”In thisway, the stigmaof racehasbecome the stigmaofcriminality.Throughout thecriminal justice

system,aswellas inourschoolsandpublicspaces,young+black+male isequatedwith reasonablesuspicion, justifying the arrest, interrogation, search, and detention of thousands ofAfricanAmericansevery year, as well as their exclusion from employment and housing and the denial of educationalopportunity.Becauseblackyouthareviewedascriminals, they facesevereemploymentdiscriminationandarealso“pushedout”ofschoolsthroughraciallybiasedschooldisciplinepolicies.54For black youth, the experience of being “made black” often begins with the first police stop,

interrogation, search, or arrest. The experience carries social meaning—this is what it means to beblack.Thestoryofone’s“firsttime”mayberepeatedtofamilyorfriends,butforghettoyouth,almostnooneimaginesthatthefirsttimewillbethelast.Theexperienceisunderstoodtodefinethetermsofone’srelationshipnotonlytothestatebuttosocietyatlarge.Thisrealitycanbefrustratingforthosewhostrivetohelpghettoyouth“turntheirlivesaround.”JamesFormanJr.,thecofounderoftheSeeForevercharterschool for juvenile offenders inWashington, D.C., made this point when describing how random anddegradingstopsandsearchesofghettoyouth“tellkidsthattheyarepariahs,thatnomatterhowhardtheystudy,theywillremainpotentialsuspects.”Onestudentcomplainedtohim,“Wecanbeperfect,perfect,doingeverythingrightandstilltheytreatuslikedogs.No,worsethandogs,becausecriminalsaretreatedworsethandogs.”Anotherstudentaskedhimpointedly,“Howcanyoutelluswecanbeanythingwhentheytreatuslikewe’renothing?”55The process of marking black youth as black criminals is essential to the functioning of mass

incarcerationasaracialcastesystem.Forthesystemtosucceed—thatis,forittoachievethepoliticalgoalsdescribedinchapter1—blackpeoplemustbelabeledcriminalsbeforetheyareformallysubjecttocontrol.Thecriminallabelisessential,forformsofexplicitracialexclusionarenotonlyprohibitedbutwidelycondemned.Thusblackyouthmustbemade—labeled—criminals.Thisprocessofbeingmadeacriminalis,toalargeextent,theprocessof“becoming”black.AsWidemanexplains,when“tobeamanofcolorofacertaineconomicclassandmilieuisequivalentinthepubliceyetobeingacriminal,”beingprocessedbythecriminaljusticesystemistantamounttobeingmadeblack,and“doingtime”behindbarsis at the same time“marking race.”56At its core, then,mass incarceration, like JimCrow, is a “race-makinginstitution.”ItservestodefinethemeaningandsignificanceofraceinAmerica.

TheLimitsoftheAnalogy

SayingthatmassincarcerationistheNewJimCrowcanleaveamisimpression.Theparallelsbetweenthe two systems of control are striking, to say the least—in both, we find racial opportunism bypoliticians, legalized discrimination, political disenfranchisement, exclusion of blacks from juries,stigmatization,theclosingofcourthousedoors,racialsegregation,andthesymbolicproductionofrace—yet there are important differences. Just as JimCrow, as a system of racial control,was dramaticallydifferentfromslavery,massincarcerationisdifferentfromitspredecessor.Infact,ifoneweretodraftalist of the differences between slavery and Jim Crow, the list might well be longer than the list ofsimilarities.ThesamegoesforJimCrowandmassincarceration.Eachsystemofcontrolhasbeenunique—well adapted to the circumstances of its time. If we fail to appreciate the differences, we will behinderedinourabilitytomeetthechallengescreatedbythecurrentmoment.Atthesametime,though,wemustbecarefulnottoassumethatdifferencesexistwhentheydonot,ortoexaggeratetheonesthatdo.Somedifferencesmayappearonthesurfacetobemajor,butoncloseanalysistheyprovelesssignificant.An example of a difference that is less significant than itmay initially appear is the “fact” that Jim

Crowwasexplicitlyrace-based,whereasmassincarcerationisnot.Thisstatementinitiallyappearsself-evident,but it ispartiallymistaken.Although it iscommon to thinkofJimCrowasanexplicitly race-basedsystem,infactanumberofthekeypolicieswereofficiallycolorblind.Aspreviouslynoted,polltaxes,literacytests,andfelondisenfranchisementlawswereallformallyrace-neutralpracticesthatwereemployed in order to avoid the prohibition on race discrimination in voting contained in the FifteenthAmendment. These laws operated to create an all-white electorate because they excluded AfricanAmericansfromthefranchisebutwerenotgenerallyappliedtowhites.Pollworkershadthediscretiontocharge a poll tax or administer a literacy test, or not, and they exercised their discretion in a raciallydiscriminatorymanner.Lawsthatsaidnothingaboutraceoperatedtodiscriminatebecausethosechargedwith enforcement were granted tremendous discretion, and they exercised that discretion in a highlydiscriminatorymanner.Thesameistrueinthedrugwar.Lawsprohibitingtheuseandsaleofdrugsarefaciallyraceneutral,

buttheyareenforcedinahighlydiscriminatoryfashion.ThedecisiontowagethedrugwarprimarilyinblackandbrowncommunitiesratherthanwhiteonesandtotargetAfricanAmericansbutnotwhitesonfreewaysandtrainstationshashadpreciselythesameeffectastheliteracyandpolltaxesofanearlierera.Afaciallyrace-neutralsystemoflawshasoperatedtocreatearacialcastesystem.Other differences between JimCrow andmass incarceration are actuallymore significant than they

may initially appear. An example relates to the role of racial stigma in our society. As discussed inchapter4,duringJimCrow,racialstigmacontributedtoracialsolidarityintheblackcommunity.Racialstigmatoday,however—thatis,thestigmaofblackcriminality—hasturnedtheblackcommunityagainstitself, destroyed networks ofmutual support, and created a silence about the new caste system amongmanyofthepeoplemostaffectedbyit.57Theimplicationsofthisdifferenceareprofound.Racialstigmatodaymakescollectiveactionextremelydifficult—sometimes impossible;whereasracialstigmaduringJimCrowcontainedtheseedsofrevolt.Described below are a number of the other important differences between Jim Crow and mass

incarceration.Listingallofthedifferenceshereisimpractical;soinsteadwewillfocusonafewofthemajordifferencesthataremostfrequentlycitedindefenseofmassincarceration,includingtheabsenceofovertracialhostility,theinclusionofwhitesinthesystemofcontrol,andAfricanAmericansupportforsome“gettough”policiesanddrugwartactics.Absenceofracialhostility.First,let’sconsidertheabsenceofovertracialhostilityamongpoliticians

whosupportharshdruglawsandthelawenforcementofficialschargedwithenforcingthem.Theabsence

of overt racial hostility is a significant difference from Jim Crow, but it can be exaggerated. Massincarceration, like JimCrow,wasbornof racial opportunism—aneffort bywhite elites to exploit theracial hostilities, resentments, and insecurities of poor and working-class whites. Moreover, racialhostility and racial violencehavenot altogetherdisappeared, given that complaints of racial slurs andbrutality by the police and prison guards are fairly common. Some scholars and commentators havepointedout that the racialviolenceonceassociatedwithbrutal slavemastersor theKuKluxKlanhasbeenreplaced,tosomeextent,byviolenceperpetratedbythestate.Racialviolencehasbeenrationalized,legitimated,andchanneledthroughourcriminaljusticesystem;itisexpressedaspolicebrutality,solitaryconfinement,andthediscriminatoryandarbitraryimpositionofthedeathpenalty.58ButevengrantingthatsomeAfricanAmericansmayfearthepolicetodayasmuchastheirgrandparents

fearedtheKlan(asawalletcanbemistakenforagun)andthatthepenalsystemmaybeasbrutalinmanyrespectsasJimCrow(orslavery), theabsenceof racialhostility in thepublicdiscourseand thesteepdeclineinvigilanteracialviolenceisnosmallmatter.Itisalsosignificantthatthe“whitesonly”signsaregoneandthatchildrenofallcolorscandrinkfromthesamewaterfountains,swiminthesamepools,andplay on the same playgrounds. Black children today can even dream of being president of theUnitedStates.Thosewhoclaimthatmassincarcerationis“justlike”JimCrowmakeaseriousmistake.Thingshave

changed.ThefactthataclearmajorityofAmericansweretellingpollstersintheearly1980s—whenthedrugwarwaskickingoff—that theyopposed racediscrimination in nearly all its forms shouldnot bedismissed lightly.59Arguably some respondentsmayhave been telling pollsterswhat they thoughtwasappropriate rather thanwhat theyactuallybelieved,but there isno reason tobelieve thatmostof themwere lying. It ismore likely thatmostAmericansby theearly1980shadcome to reject segregationistthinkingandvalues,andnotonlydidnotwanttobethoughtofasracistbutdidnotwanttoberacist.This difference in public attitudes has important implications for reform efforts. Claims that mass

incarceration isanalogous toJimCrowwill fallondeafearsandalienatepotentialallies ifadvocatesfailtomakeclearthattheclaimisnotmeanttosuggestorimplythatsupportersofthecurrentsystemareracist in the way Americans have come to understand that term. Race plays a major role—indeed, adefiningrole—inthecurrentsystem,butnotbecauseofwhatiscommonlyunderstoodasold-fashioned,hostile bigotry. This system of control depends farmore on racial indifference (defined as a lack ofcompassion and caring about race and racial groups) than racial hostility—a feature it actually shareswithitspredecessors.All racialcastesystems,not justmass incarceration,havebeensupportedbyracial indifference.As

noted earlier, many whites during the Jim Crow era sincerely believed that African Americans wereintellectuallyandmorally inferior.Theymeantblacksnoharmbutbelievedsegregationwasasensiblesystemformanagingasocietycomprisedoffundamentallydifferentandunequalpeople.Thesincerityofmanypeople’sracialbeliefsiswhatledMartinLutherKingJr.todeclare,“Nothinginalltheworldismoredangerousthansincereignoranceandconscientiousstupidity.”Thenotionthatracialcastesystemsarenecessarilypredicatedonadesiretoharmotherracialgroups,andthatracialhostilityistheessenceof racism, is fundamentallymisguided.Even slaverydoesnot conform to this limitedunderstandingofracismandracialcaste.Mostplantationownerssupportedtheinstitutionofblackslaverynotbecauseofasadisticdesiretoharmblacksbutinsteadbecausetheywantedtogetrich,andblackslaverywasthemostefficientmeans to thatend.Byand large,plantationownerswere indifferent to thesufferingcausedbyslavery; theyweremotivated by greed. Preoccupationwith the role of racial hostility in earlier castesystems can blind us to theways inwhich every caste system, includingmass incarceration, has beensupportedbyracialindifference—alackofcaringandcompassionforpeopleofotherraces.White victims of racial caste. We now turn to another important difference between mass

incarcerationandJimCrow:thedirectharmtowhitescausedbythecurrentcastesystem.Whitesnever

hadtositatthebackofthebusduringJimCrow,buttodayawhitemanmayfindhimselfinprisonforadrug offense, sharing a cell with a black man. The direct harm caused to whites caused by massincarceration seems to distinguish it from JimCrow; yet, likemany of the other differences, this onerequires some qualification. Some whites were directly harmed by Jim Crow. For example, a whitewomanwhofellinlovewithablackmanandhopedtospendtherestofherlifewithhimwasdirectlyharmed by anti-miscegenation laws. The laws were intended for her benefit—to protect her from thecorruptinginfluenceoftheblackmanandthe“tragedy”ofmulattochildren—butshewasdirectlyharmednonetheless.Still,itseemsobviousthatmassincarcerationdirectlyharmsfarmorewhitesthanJimCroweverdid.

Forsome,thisfactalonemaybereasonenoughtorejecttheanalogy.An“interracialracialcastesystem”mayseemlikeanoxy-moron.Whatkindofracialcastesystemincludeswhitepeoplewithinitscontrol?Theanswer:aracialcastesystemintheageofcolorblindness.If 100 percent of the people arrested and convicted for drug offenses were African American, the

situationwouldprovokeoutrageamongthemajorityofAmericanswhoconsiderthemselvesnonracistandwhoknowverywellthatLatinos,AsianAmericans,andwhitesalsocommitdrugcrimes.We,asanation,seemcomfortablewith90percentof thepeoplearrestedandconvictedofdrugoffenses insomestatesbeingAfricanAmerican,butifthefigurewere100percent,theveilofcolorblindnesswouldbelost.Wecouldnolongertellourselvesstoriesaboutwhy90percentmightbeareasonablefigure;norcouldwecontinuetoassumethatgoodreasonsexistforextremeracialdisparitiesinthedrugwar,evenifweareunabletothinkofsuchreasonsourselves.Inshort,theinclusionofsomewhitesinthesystemofcontrolisessentialtopreservingtheimageofacolorblindcriminaljusticesystemandmaintainingourself-imageasfairandunbiasedpeople.BecausemostAmericans,includingthosewithinlawenforcement,wanttobelievetheyarenonracist,thesufferinginthedrugwarcrossesthecolorline.Ofcourse,thefactthatwhitepeopleareharmedbythedrugwardoesnotmeantheyaretherealtargets,

thedesignatedenemy.TheharmwhitepeoplesufferinthedrugwarismuchliketheharmIraqicivilianssufferinU.S.militaryactionstargetingpresumedterroristsorinsurgents.Inanywar,atremendousamountofcollateraldamage is inevitable.Blackandbrownpeopleare theprincipal targets in thiswar;whitepeoplearecollateraldamage.Sayingthatwhitepeoplearecollateraldamagemaysoundcallous,butitreflectsaparticularreality.

Massincarcerationasweknowitwouldnotexisttodaybutfortheracializationofcrimeinthemediaandpolitical discourse.TheWar onDrugswas declared as part of a political ploy to capitalize onwhiteracialresentmentagainstAfricanAmericans,andtheReaganadministrationusedtheemergenceofcrackanditsrelatedviolenceasanopportunitytobuildaracializedpublicconsensusinsupportofanall-outwar—aconsensusthatalmostcertainlywouldnothavebeenformediftheprimaryusersanddealersofcrackhadbeenwhite.EconomistGlennLourymadethisobservationinhisbookTheAnatomyofRacialInequality.Henoted

thatitisnearlyimpossibletoimagineanythingremotelysimilartomassincarcerationhappeningtoyoungwhitemen. Canwe envision a system that would enforce drug laws almost exclusively among youngwhitemenand largely ignoredrugcrimeamongyoungblackmen?Canwe imagine largemajoritiesofyoung white men being rounded up for minor drug offenses, placed under the control of the criminaljusticesystem, labeled felons,and thensubjected toa lifetimeofdiscrimination,scorn,andexclusion?Canweimaginethishappeningwhilemostblackmenlandeddecentjobsortrottedofftocollege?No,wecannot. If such a thing occurred, “it would occasion amost profound reflection about what had gonewrong,notonlywithTHEM,butwithUS.”60Itwouldneverbedismissedwiththethoughtthatwhitemenweresimplyreapingwhattheyhavesown.Thecriminalizationofwhitemenwoulddisturbustothecore.So the critical questions are: “What disturbs us?What is dissonant?What seems anomalous?What iscontrarytoexpectation?”61Ormoretothepoint:Whomdowecareabout?

Ananswertothelastquestionmaybefoundbyconsideringthedrasticallydifferentmannerthatwe,asanation,respondedtodrunkdrivinginthemid-1980s,ascomparedtocrackcocaine.Duringthe1980s,atthe same time crack was making headlines, a broad-based, grassroots movement was under way toaddressthewidespreadandsometimesfatalproblemofdrunkdriving.Unlikethedrugwar,whichwasinitiatedbypoliticaleliteslongbeforeordinarypeopleidentifieditasanissueofextraordinaryconcern,themovementtocrackdownondrunkdriverswasabottom-upmovement,ledmostnotablybymotherswhosefamilieswereshatteredbydeathscausedbydrunkdriving.Media coverageof themovementpeaked in1988,when adrunkdriver traveling thewrongwayon

Interstate71 inKentuckycausedahead-oncollisionwithaschoolbus.Twenty-sevenpeoplediedanddozensmorewereinjuredintheensuingfire.Thetragicaccident,knownastheCarrolltonbusdisaster,was one of theworst inU.S. history. In the aftermath, several parents of the victims became activelyinvolvedinMothersAgainstDrunkDriving(MADD),andonebecameitsnationalpresident.Throughoutthe1980s,drunkdrivingwasaregulartopicinthemedia,andthetermdesignateddriverbecamepartoftheAmericanlexicon.Atthecloseofthedecade,drunkdriverswereresponsibleforapproximately22,000deathsannually,

while overall alcohol-related deathswere close to 100,000 a year. By contrast, during the same timeperiod, therewerenoprevalence statistics at all on crack,much less crack-relateddeaths. In fact, thenumberofdeathsrelatedtoallillegaldrugscombinedwastinycomparedtothenumberofdeathscausedby drunk drivers. The total of all drug-related deaths due to AIDS, drug overdose, or the violenceassociatedwiththeillegaldrugtrade,wasestimatedat21,000annually—lessthanthenumberofdeathsdirectlycausedbydrunkdrivers,andasmallfractionofthenumberofalcohol-relateddeathsthatoccureveryyear.62In response to growing concern—fueled by advocacy groups such as MADD and by the media

coverage of drunk-driving fatalities—most states adopted tougher laws to punish drunk driving.Numerousstatesnowhavesometypeofmandatorysentencingforthisoffense—typicallytwodaysinjailfor a first offense and two to ten days for a second offense.63 Possession of a tiny amount of crackcocaine,ontheotherhand,carriesamandatoryminimumsentenceoffiveyearsinfederalprison.The vastly different sentences afforded drunk drivers and drug offenders speaks volumes regarding

who is viewed as disposable—someone to be purged from the body politic—and who is not. Drunkdriversarepredominantlywhiteandmale.Whitemencomprised78percentofthearrestsforthisoffensein 1990 when new mandatory minimums governing drunk driving were being adopted.64 They aregenerallychargedwithmisdemeanorsandtypicallyreceivesentencesinvolvingfines,licensesuspension,andcommunityservice.Althoughdrunkdrivingcarriesafargreaterriskofviolentdeaththantheuseorsaleofillegaldrugs,thesocietalresponsetodrunkdrivershasgenerallyemphasizedkeepingthepersonfunctional and in society,while attempting to respond to thedangerousbehavior through treatment andcounseling.65 People chargedwith drug offenses, though, are disproportionately poor people of color.Theyaretypicallychargedwithfeloniesandsentencedtoprison.Anothercluethatmassincarceration,asweknowit,wouldnotexistbutfortheraceoftheimagined

enemy can be found in the history of drug-law enforcement in theUnited States.Yale historianDavidMustoandotherscholarshavedocumentedadisturbing,thoughunsurprisingpattern:punishmentbecomesmore severewhen drug use is associatedwith people of color but softenswhen it is associatedwithwhites.66Thehistoryofmarijuanapolicyisagoodexample.Intheearly1900s,marijuanawasperceived—rightlyorwrongly—asadrugusedbyblacksandMexicanAmericans,leadingtotheBoggsActofthe1950s,penalizingfirst-timepossessionofmarijuanawithasentenceoftwotofiveyearsinprison.67 Inthe 1960s, though, when marijuana became associated with the white middle class and college kids,commissionswerepromptlycreatedtostudywhethermarijuanawasreallyasharmfulasoncethought.By

1970, theComprehensiveDrugAbuse Prevention andControlAct differentiatedmarijuana from othernarcoticsandloweredfederalpenalties.68Thesamedrugthathadbeenconsideredfearsometwentyyearsearlier,whenassociatedwithAfricanAmericansandLatinos,wasrefashionedasarelativelyharmlessdrugwhenassociatedwithwhites.In view of the nation’s treatment of predominately white drunk drivers and drug offenders, it is

extremelydifficult to imagine thatournationwouldhavedeclaredall-outwarondrugoffenders if theenemyhadbeendefinedinthepublicimaginationaswhite.Itwastheconflationofblacknessandcrimeinthemediaandpoliticaldiscoursethatmadethedrugwarandthesudden,massiveexpansionofourprisonsystempossible.Whitedrug“criminals”arecollateraldamage in theWaronDrugsbecause theyhavebeenharmedbyawardeclaredwithblacksinmind.Whilethiscircumstanceishorriblyunfortunateforthem, it does create important opportunities for a multiracial, bottom-up resistance movement, one inwhichpeopleofallracescanclaimaclearstake.Forthefirsttimeinournation’shistory,itmaybecomereadilyapparenttowhiteshowthey,too,canbeharmedbyantiblackracism—afactthat,untilnow,hasbeendifficultformanytograsp.Blacksupportfor“gettough”policies.YetanothernotabledifferencebetweenJimCrowandmass

incarcerationisthatmanyAfricanAmericansseemtosupportthecurrentsystemofcontrol,whilemostbelievethesamecouldnotbesaidofJimCrow.Itisfrequentlyarguedindefenseofmassincarcerationthat African Americans want more police and more prisons because crime is so bad in some ghettocommunities. It is wrong, these defenders claim, for the tactics of mass incarceration—such as theconcentration of law enforcement in poor communities of color, the stop-and-frisk programs that haveproliferated nationwide, the eviction of drugoffenders and their families frompublic housing, and thedrug sweeps of ghetto neighborhoods—to be characterized as racially discriminatory, because thoseprograms and policies have been adopted for the benefit of African American communities and aresupportedbymanyghetto residents.69 Ignoring rampant crime in ghetto communitieswould be raciallydiscriminatory,theysay;respondingforcefullytoitisnot.Thisargument,onthesurface,seemsrelativelystraightforward,butthereareactuallymanylayerstoit,

someofwhicharequiteproblematic.Tobeginwith,theargumentimpliesthatAfricanAmericanspreferharsh criminal justice policies to other forms of governmental intervention, such as job creation,economicdevelopment,educationalreform,andrestorativejusticeprograms,asthelong-termsolutiontoproblemsassociatedwithcrime.Thereisnoevidencetosupportsuchaclaim.Tothecontrary,surveysconsistentlyshowthatAfricanAmericansaregenerallylesssupportiveofharshcriminaljusticepoliciesthanwhites,eventhoughblacksarefarmorelikelytobevictimsofcrime.70Thispatternisparticularlyremarkableinthatlesseducatedpeopletendtobemorepunitiveandblacksonaveragearelesseducatedthanwhites.71ThenotionthatAfricanAmericanssupport“gettough”approachestocrimeisfurthercomplicatedby

thefactthat“crime”isnotagenericcategory.Therearemanydifferenttypesofcrime,andviolentcrimetendstoprovokethemostvisceralandpunitiveresponse.Yetaswehaveseeninchapter2,thedrugwarhas not been aimed at rooting out the most violent drug traffickers, or so-called kingpins. The vastmajorityofthosearrestedfordrugcrimesarenotchargedwithseriousoffenses,andmostofthepeopleinstate prisonondrug charges havenohistoryof violenceor significant selling activity.Thosewho are“kingpins” are often able to buy their freedomby forfeiting their assets, snitchingonother dealers, orbecoming paid government informants. Thus, to the extent that someAfricanAmericans support harshpolicies aimed at violent offenders, they cannot be said to support theWar onDrugs,which has beenwagedprimarilyagainstnonviolent,low-leveloffendersinpoorcommunitiesofcolor.TheonethingthatisclearfromthesurveydataandethnographicresearchisthatAfricanAmericansin

ghetto communities experience an intense “dual frustration” regarding crime and law enforcement. As

GlennLouryexplainedmorethanadecadeago,whenviolentcrimeratesweremakingheadlines,“Theyoungblackmenwreakinghavocintheghettoarestill‘ouryoungsters’intheeyesofmanyofthedecentpoor and working-class black people who sometimes are their victims.”72 Throughout the blackcommunity,thereiswidespreadawarenessthatblackghettoyouthhavefew,ifany,realisticoptions,andthereforedealingdrugscanbean irresistible temptation.Suburbanwhiteyouthmaydealdrugs to theirfriendsandacquaintancesasaformofrecreationandextracash,butforghettoyouth,drugsales—thoughrarely lucrative—areoften ameansof survival, ameansofhelping to feed and clothe themselves andtheir families.The fact that this “career”path leads almost inevitably to jail isoftenunderstoodas anunfortunatefactoflife,partofwhatitmeanstobeblackinAmerica.Women,inparticular,expresscomplicated,conflictedviewsaboutcrime,becausetheylovetheirsons,

husbands,andpartnersandunderstandtheirplightascurrentandfuturemembersoftheracialundercaste.At the same time, though, they abhor gangs and the violence associated with inner-city life. Onecommentator explained, “AfricanAmericanwomen in poor neighborhoods are torn.Theyworry abouttheiryoungsonsgettinginvolvedingangactivity.Theyworryabouttheirsonspossiblysellingorusingdrugs.Theyworryabouttheirchildrengettingcaughtinthecrossfireofwarringgangs....Thesemotherswant better crime and law enforcement.Yet, they understand that increased levels of law enforcementpotentiallysaddle theirchildrenwithafelonyconviction—amark thatcanensureeconomicandsocialmarginalization.”73Giventhedilemmafacingpoorblackcommunities,itisinaccuratetosaythatblackpeople“support”

massincarcerationor“get tough”policies.Thefact thatsomeblackpeopleendorseharshresponsestocrime is best understood as a form of complicity with mass incarceration—not support for it. Thiscomplicityisperfectlyunderstandable,forthethreatposedbycrime—particularlyviolentcrime—isreal,notimagined.AlthoughAfricanAmericansdonotengageindrugcrimeatsignificantlyhigherratesthanwhites,blackmendohavemuchhigherratesofviolentcrime,andviolentcrimeisconcentratedinghettocommunities.Studieshaveshownthatjoblessness—notraceorblackculture—explainsthehighratesofviolentcrimeinpoorblackcommunities.Whenresearchershavecontrolledforjoblessness,differencesinviolentcrimeratesbetweenyoungblackandwhitemendisappear.74Regardless, therealityforpoorblackstrappedinghettosremainsthesame:theymustliveinastateofperpetualinsecurityandfear.Itisperfectlyunderstandable,then,thatsomeAfricanAmericanswouldbecomplicitwith the systemofmass incarceration, even if theyoppose, as amatter of social policy, thecreation of racially isolated ghettos and the subsequent transfer of black youth from underfunded,crumbling schools to brand-new, high-tech prisons. In the era of mass incarceration, poor AfricanAmericansarenotgiventheoptionofgreatschools,communityinvestment,andjobtraining.Instead,theyareofferedpoliceandprisons.Iftheonlychoicethatisofferedblacksisrampantcrimeormoreprisons,thepredictable(andunderstandable)answerwillbe“moreprisons.”The predicament African Americans find themselves in today is not altogether different from the

situationtheyfacedduringJimCrow.JimCrow,asoppressiveasitwas,offeredameasureofsecurityforblackswhowerewillingtoplaybyitsrules.Thosewhofloutedtherulesorresistedthemriskedtheterrorof theKlan.Cooperationwith the JimCrowsystemoften seemed farmore likely to increaseormaintainone’ssecuritythananyalternative.ThatrealityhelpstoexplainwhyAfricanAmericanleaderssuchasBookerT.Washingtonurgedblackstofocusonimprovingthemselvesratherthanonchallengingracialdiscrimination.ItisalsowhytheCivilRightsMovementinitiallymetsignificantresistanceamongsomeAfricanAmericansintheSouth.CivilrightsadvocatesstrenuouslyarguedthatitwasthementalityandideologythatgaverisetoJimCrowthatwastherealsourceofthedangerexperiencedbyblacks.Ofcourse theywere right.But it is understandablewhy someblacks believed their immediate safety andsecurity could best be protected by cooperation with the prevailing caste system. The fact that blackpeople during JimCrowwere often complicitwith the systemof control did notmean they supported

racialoppression.Today complicity with the system ofmass incarcerationmay seem like the best option for African

Americans, though in reality it is no option at all.We declared a war on people residing in raciallysegregatedghettos—justatthemomenttheireconomieshadcollapsed—ratherthanprovidingcommunityinvestment,qualityeducation,andjobtrainingwhenworkdisappeared.Ofcoursethosecommunitiesaresufferingfromseriouscrimetoday.Didweexpectotherwise?Didwethinkthat,miraculously,theywouldthrive? And now, having waged this war for decades, we claim some blacks “support” massincarceration,asthoughtheywouldratherhavetheiryoungmenwarehousedinprisonthangoingoff tocollege.AspoliticaltheoristTommieShelbyhasobserved,“Individualsareforcedtomakechoicesinanenvironmenttheydidnotchoose.Theywouldsurelyprefertohaveabroaderarrayofgoodopportunities.The questionwe should be asking—not instead of but in addition to questions about penal policy—iswhetherthedenizensoftheghettoareentitledtoabettersetofoptions,andifso,whoseresponsibilityitistoprovidethem.”75ClearlyamuchbettersetofoptionscouldbeprovidedtoAfricanAmericans—andpoorpeopleofall

colors—today.AshistorianLeroneBennettJr.eloquentlyremindsus,“anation isachoice.”Wecouldchoosetobeanationthatextendscare,compassion,andconcerntothosewhoarelockedupandlockedout or headed for prison before they are old enough to vote. We could seek for them the sameopportunitiesweseekforourownchildren;wecouldtreatthemlikeoneof“us.”Wecoulddothat.Orwecanchoosetobeanationthatshamesandblamesitsmostvulnerable,affixesbadgesofdishonoruponthematyoungages,andthenrelegatesthemtoapermanentsecond-classstatusforlife.Thatisthepathwehavechosen,anditleadstoafamiliarplace.WefacedaforkintheroadonedecadeafterMartinLutherKingJr.andMalcolmXwerelaidtorest.

Asdescribedinchapter1,duringthelate1970s,jobshadsuddenlydisappearedfromurbanareasacrossAmerica,andunemploymentrateshadskyrocketed.In1954,blackandwhiteyouthunemploymentratesinAmericawereequal,withblacksactuallyhavingaslightlyhigher rateofemployment in theagegroupsixteen to nineteen.By 1984, however, the black unemployment rate had nearly quadrupled,while thewhiteratehadincreasedonlymarginally.76Thiswasnotduetoamajorchangeinblackvaluesorblackculture; this dramatic shift was the result of deindustrialization, globalization, and technologicaladvancement. Urban factories shut down as our nation transitioned to a service economy. SuddenlyAfricanAmericansweretrappedinjoblessghettos,desperateforwork.Theeconomiccollapseof inner-cityblackcommunitiescouldhave inspiredanationaloutpouringof

compassionandsupport.AnewWaronPovertycouldhavebeenlaunched.EconomicstimuluspackagescouldhavesailedthroughCongresstobailoutthosetrappedinjoblessghettosthroughnofaultoftheirown.Education,jobtraining,publictransportation,andrelocationassistancecouldhavebeenprovided,sothatyouthofcolorwouldhavebeenabletosurvivetheroughtransitiontoanewglobaleconomyandsecure jobs in distant suburbs. Constructive interventionswould have been good not only forAfricanAmericans trapped in ghettos, but also for blue-collar workers of all colors, many of whom weresufferingtoo,iflessseverely.Awaveofcompassionandconcerncouldhavefloodedpoorandworking-class communities, in honor of the lateMartinLutherKing Jr.All of this could have happened, but itdidn’t.InsteadwedeclaredaWaronDrugs.Thecollapseofinner-cityeconomiescoincidedwiththeconservativebacklashagainsttheCivilRights

Movement,resultingintheperfectstorm.Almostovernight,blackmenfoundthemselvesunnecessarytotheAmerican economy and demonized bymainstream society.No longer needed to pick cotton in thefields or labor in factories, lower-class black men were hauled off to prison in droves. They werevilifiedinthemediaandcondemnedfortheirconditionaspartofawell-orchestratedpoliticalcampaigntobuildanewwhite,RepublicanmajorityintheSouth.Decadeslater,curiousonlookersinthegripsofdenialwouldwonderaloud,“Wherehavealltheblackmengone?”

Noonehasmade thispointbetter thansociologistLoïcWacquant.Wacquanthaswrittenextensivelyabout the cyclical nature of racial caste in America. He emphasizes that the one thing thatmakes thecurrentpenalapparatusstrikinglydifferentfrompreviousracialcastesystemsisthat“itdoesnotcarryoutthepositiveeconomicmissionofrecruitmentanddiscipliningoftheworkforce.”77Insteaditservesonlytowarehousepoorblackandbrownpeopleforincreasinglylengthyperiodsoftime,oftenuntiloldage.The new systemdoes not seek primarily to benefit unfairly fromblack labor, as earlier caste systemshave,butinsteadviewsAfricanAmericansaslargelyirrelevantandunnecessarytothenewlystructuredeconomy—aneconomythatisnolongerdrivenbyunskilledlabor.It is fair to say thatwehavewitnessedanevolution in theUnitedStates froma racial caste system

basedentirelyonexploitation(slavery),toonebasedlargelyonsubordination(JimCrow),toonedefinedbymarginalization(massincarceration).Whilemarginalizationmaysoundfarpreferabletoexploitation,itmay prove to be evenmore dangerous. Extrememarginalization, aswe have seen throughoutworldhistory,posestheriskofextermination.TragediessuchastheHolocaustinGermanyorethniccleansinginBosnia are traceable to the extrememarginalization and stigmatization of racial and ethnic groups.Aslegalscholarjohna.powelloncecommented,onlyhalfinjest,“It’sactuallybettertobeexploitedthanmarginalized,insomerespects,becauseifyou’reexploitedpresumablyyou’restillneeded.”78Viewedinthislight,thefranticaccusationsofgenocidebypoorblacksintheearlyyearsoftheWaron

Drugsseem lessparanoid.The intuitionof those residing inghettocommunities that theyhadsuddenlybecomedisposablewas rooted in real changes in theeconomy—changes thathavebeendevastating topoorblackcommunitiesasfactorieshaveclosed,low-skilljobshavedisappeared,andallthosewhohadthemeanstofleetheghettodid.Thesenseamongthoseleftbehindthatsocietynolongerhasuseforthem,andthatthegovernmentnowaimssimplytogetridofthem,reflectsarealitythatmanyofuswhoclaimtocareprefertoavoidsimplybychangingchannels.

6

TheFireThisTime

ShortlyaftersunriseonSeptember20,2007,morethantenthousandprotestorshadalreadydescendedonJena,Louisiana,asmalltownofaboutthreethousandpeople.BecauseofthecongestionontheroadstoJena,someprotestorslefttheirvehiclesandwalkedintotownonfoot.JesseJackson,AlSharpton,andMartin Luther King III were among thosewho traveled hundreds ofmiles to participate in what washeraldedas“thebeginningsofanewcivilrightsmovement.”1Blackyouthturnedouttoprotestinrecordnumbers,joinedbyrappersMosDef,IceCube,andSalt-n-

Pepa.Nationalnewsmediaswarmedthetown;camerasrolledasthousandsofprotestorsfromalloverthecountrypoured into the rural community tocondemn theattemptedmurdercharges filedagainst sixblackteenagerswhoallegedlybeatawhiteclassmateatalocalhighschool.Thiswas no ordinary schoolyard fight.Manybelieved the attackwas related to a string of racially

chargedconflictsandcontroversiesat theschool,mostnotablythehangingofnoosesfromatreeintheschool’s main courtyard. Rev. Al Sharpton captured the spirit of the protest when he stated boldly,“We’vegonefromplantationstopenitentiaries....Theyhavetriedtocreateacriminaljusticesystemthatparticularlytargetsouryoungblackmen.Andnowwesitandstandinacitythatsaysit’sapranktohangahangman’snoose,butthatitisattemptedmurdertohaveafight.Wecannotsitbysilently.That’swhywecame,andthat’swhyweintendtokeepcoming.”2Foramoment,thenation’seyesweretrainedontheplightofthe“Jena6,”anddebatescouldbeheard

inbarbershops,incafés,andinlinesatgrocerystoresaboutwhetherthecriminaljusticesystemwas,infact, biased against blackmen orwhether the black teens got exactlywhat they deserved for a brutalattackonadefenselessyoungwhiteteen.Grimstatisticsaboutthenumberofblackmeninprisonweretrotted out, and commentators argued over whether those numbers reflected crime rates or bias andwhetherwhiteteenswouldeverbechargedwithattemptedmurderandtriedasadultsiftheyattackedablackkidinaschoolyardfight.Theuprisingonbehalfof thesixblackteenspaidoff.Althoughtheprosecutorrefusedtobackdown

fromhisdecisiontobringadultchargesagainst theyouths,anappellatecourtultimatelyruledtheteenshad to be tried as juveniles, and many of the charges were reduced or dropped. While this resultundoubtedlycheeredthethousandsofJena6supportersaroundthecountry,thespectaclemayhavebeenoddlyunsettlingtoparentsofchildrenimprisonedforfarlessseriouscrimes,includingthoselockedupforminordrugoffenses.Whereweretheprotestorsandcivilrightsleaderswhentheirchildrenweretriedasadultsandcartedofftoadultprisons?Wherewasthenationalnewsmediathen?Theirchildrenwereaccusedofnocrimesofviolence,noactsofcruelty,yettheyfacedadultcriminalchargesandtheprospectof servingyears, perhapsdecades, behindbars for possessingor selling illegal drugs—crimes that golargely ignoredwhen committed bywhite youth.Why the outpouringof support and the promises of a“newcivilrightsmovement”onbehalfoftheJenayouthbutnottheirchildren?Iftherehadbeennonooseshangingfromaschoolyardtree,therewouldhavebeennoJena6—nomass

protests, no live coverage on CNN. The decision to charge six black teens as adults with attemptedmurderinconnectionwithaschoolyardfightwasunderstoodaspossiblyracistbythemainstreammediaandsomeprotestorsonlybecauseofthesensationalfactthatnooseswerefirsthungfromatree.Itwasthisrelic—thenoose—showingupsobrazenlyandleadingtoaseriesofraciallychargedconflictsand

controversies that made it possible for the news media and the country as a whole to entertain thepossibilitythatthesesixyouthsmaywellhavebeentreatedtoJimCrowjustice.Itwasthisevidenceofold-fashioned racism that made it possible for a new generation of protestors to frame the attemptedmurderchargesagainstsixblackteensinamannerthatmainstreamAmericawouldunderstandasracist.Ironically,itwaspreciselythisframingthatensuredthattheeventsinJenawouldnotactuallylauncha

“newcivilrightsmovement.”Anewcivilrightsmovementcannotbeorganizedaroundtherelicsoftheearliersystemofcontrolifitistoaddressmeaningfullytheracialrealitiesofourtime.Anyracialjusticemovement,tobesuccessful,mustvigorouslychallengethepublicconsensusthatunderliestheprevailingsystemof control.Nooses, racial slurs, andovert bigotry arewidely condemnedbypeople across thepoliticalspectrum;theyareunderstoodtoberemnantsofthepast,nolongerreflectiveoftheprevailingpublicconsensusaboutrace.Challengingtheseformsofracismiscertainlynecessary,aswemustalwaysremainvigilant,but itwilldo little to shake the foundationsof thecurrent systemof control.Thenewcastesystem,unlikeitspredecessors,isofficiallycolorblind.Wemustdealwithitonitsownterms.

RethinkingDenial—Or,WhereAreCivilRightsAdvocatesWhenYouNeedThem?

Dealingwiththissystemonitsowntermsiscomplicatedbytheproblemofdenial.FewAmericanstodayrecognize mass incarceration for what it is: a new caste system thinly veiled by the cloak ofcolorblindness.Hundredsofthousandsofpeopleofcoloraresweptintothissystemandreleasedeveryyear,yetwerationalizethesystematicdiscriminationandexclusionandturnablindeyetothesuffering.Our collective denial is not merely an inconvenient fact; it is a major stumbling block to publicunderstanding of the role of race in our society, and it sharply limits the opportunities for trulytransformativecollectiveaction.The general public’s collective denial is fairly easy to forgive—if not excuse—for all the reasons

discussedinchapter5.Theawkwardsilenceofthecivilrightscommunity,however,ismoreproblematic.Ifsomethingakintoaracialcastesystemtrulyexists,whyhasthecivilrightscommunitybeensoslowtoacknowledgeit?Indeed,howcouldcivilrightsorganizations,someofwhicharelargerandbetterfundedthanatanypointinAmericanhistory,haveallowedthishumanrightsnightmaretooccurontheirwatch?Theanswerisnotthatcivilrightsadvocatesareindifferenttoracialbiasinthecriminaljusticesystem.

Tothecontrary,wecarequitealot.Norhavewebeenentirelyignorantoftherealitiesofthenewcastesystem. In recentyears,civil rightsadvocateshave launched important reformefforts,mostnotably thecampaignschallengingfelondisenfranchisementlaws,crack-sentencingpolicies,andracialprofilingbylawenforcement.Civil rightsgroupshavealsodeveloped litigationand importantcoalitions related totheschool-to-prisonpipeline,inadequateindigentdefense,andjuvenilejusticereform,tonameafew.Despitetheseimportantefforts,whatismoststrikingaboutthecivilrightscommunity’sresponsetothe

massincarcerationofpeopleofcoloristherelativequiet.Giventhemagnitude—thesheerscale—oftheNewJimCrow,onewouldexpectthattheWaronDrugswouldbethetoppriorityofeverycivilrightsorganization in the country.Conferences, strategy sessions, and debates regarding how best to build amovement todismantle thenewcaste systemwouldbeoccurringon a regular basis.Major grassrootsorganizingeffortswouldbeunderwayinnearlyeverystateandcitynationwide.Foundationswouldbelobbied to prioritize criminal justice reform. Media campaigns would be unleashed in an effort tooverturn the punitive public consensus on race. The rhetoric associated with specific reform effortswouldstresstheneedtoendmassincarceration,notmerelytinkerwithit,andeffortswouldbemadetobuildmultiracialcoalitionsbasedontheunderstandingthattheracialpoliticsthatgavebirthtotheWaronDrugshaveharmedpoor andworking-classwhites aswell as people of color.All of that could havehappened,butitdidn’t.Whynot?Part of the answer is that civil rights organizations—like all institutions—are comprised of fallible

humanbeings.Theprevailingpublicconsensusaffectseveryone,includingcivilrightsadvocates.Thoseofusinthecivilrightscommunityarenotimmunetotheracialstereotypesthatpervademediaimageryandpolitical rhetoric;nordoweoperateoutsideof thepoliticalcontext.Likemostpeople,we tend toresistbelievingthatwemightbepartoftheproblem.Oneday,civilrightsorganizationsmaybeembarrassedbyhowlongittookthemtomoveoutofdenial

and do the hard work necessary to end mass incarceration. Rather than blaming civil rights groups,however,itisfarmoreproductivetounderstandthereasonswhytheresponsetomassincarcerationhasbeensoconstrained.Again,it’snotthatcivilrightsadvocatesdon’tcare;wedo.Andit’snotjustthatweare afflicted by unconscious racial bias and stereotypes about those behind bars. Civil rightsorganizationshavereasonsfortheirconstraint—reasonsthatnolongermakegoodsense,eveniftheyoncedid.Abitofcivilrightshistorymaybehelpfulhere.Civilrightsadvocacyhasnotalwayslookedthewayit

doestoday.Throughoutmostofournation’shistory—fromthedaysoftheabolitionistmovementthrough

theCivilRightsMovement—racialjusticeadvocacyhasgenerallyrevolvedaroundgrassrootsorganizingandthestrategicmobilizationofpublicopinion.Inrecentyears,however,abitofmythologyhassprungup regarding the centrality of litigation to racial justice struggles. The success of the brilliant legalcrusade that led toBrownv.BoardofEducationhascreatedawidespreadperception that civil rightslawyersarethemostimportantplayersinracialjusticeadvocacy.ThisimagewasenhancedfollowingthepassageoftheCivilRightsActsof1965,whencivilrightslawyersbecameembroiledinhighlyvisibleandcontroversialeffortstoendhiringdiscrimination,createaffirmativeactionplans,andenforceschooldesegregation orders. As public attention shifted from the streets to the courtroom, the extraordinarygrassrootsmovementthatmadecivilrightslegislationpossiblefadedfrompublicview.Thelawyerstookover.With all deliberate speed, civil rights organizations became “professionalized” and increasingly

disconnected from thecommunities theyclaimed to represent.Legal scholarand formerNAACPLegalDefenseFund lawyerDerrickBellwasamong the first tocritique thisphenomenon,arguing ina1976Yale Law Journal article that civil rights lawyers were pursuing their own agendas in schooldesegregationcasesevenwhentheyconflictedwiththeirclients’expresseddesires.3Twodecadeslater,former NAACP Legal Defense Fund lawyer and current Harvard Law School professor Lani Guinierpublishedamemoirinwhichsheacknowledgedthat,“bytheearly1990s,[civilrights]litigatorslikemehadbecomeliketheWashingtoninsidersweweresosuspiciousof....Wereflexivelydistancedourselvesfromtheverypeopleonwhosebehalfwebroughtthecasesinthefirstplace.”4Thisshift,shenoted,hadprofound consequences for the future of racial justice advocacy; in fact, it was debilitating to themovement.Insteadofamoralcrusade,themovementbecameanalmostpurelylegalcrusade.Civilrightsadvocatespursued theirownagendasasunelected representativesof communitiesdefinedby raceanddisplayedconsiderableskillnavigatingcourtroomsandhallsofpoweracrossAmerica.Thelawbecamewhatthelawyersandlobbyistssaiditwas,withlittleornoinputfromthepeoplewhosefatehunginthebalance.Guiniercontinued:

Incharge,wechanneledapassionforchange into legalnegotiationsand lawsuits.Wedefined theissues in terms of developing legal doctrine and establishing legal precedent; our clients becameimportant,butsecondary,playersinaformalarenathatrequiredlawyerstotranslatelayclaimsintotechnical speech. We then disembodied plaintiffs’ claims in judicially manageable or judiciallyenforceable terms,unenforceablewithoutmore lawyers.Simultaneously, themovement’scenterofgravity shifted toWashington,D.C.As lawyers andnational pundits becamemoreprominent thanclients and citizens, we isolated ourselves from the people whowere our anchor and onwhosebehalfwehadlabored.Wenotonlyleftpeoplebehind;wealsolosttouchwiththemoralforceattheheartofthemovementitself.5

Notsurprisingly,ascivilrightsadvocatesconvertedagrassrootsmovementintoalegalcampaign,andascivilrightsleadersbecamepoliticalinsiders,manycivilrightsorganizationsbecametop-heavywithlawyers. This development enhanced their ability to wage legal battles but impeded their ability toacknowledgeorrespondtotheemergenceofanewcastesystem.Lawyershaveatendencytoidentifyandconcentrateonproblems theyknowhow to solve—i.e.,problems thatcanbe solved through litigation.Themassincarcerationofpeopleofcolorisnotthatkindofproblem.Widespreadpreoccupationwith litigation,however, isnot theonly—oreven themain—reasoncivil

rights groups have shied away from challenging the new caste system.Challengingmass incarcerationrequiressomethingcivilrightsadvocateshavelongbeenreluctanttodo:advocacyonbehalfofcriminals.Even at the height of JimCrow segregation—whenblackmenweremore likely to be lynched than toreceiveafairtrialintheSouth—NAACPlawyerswerereluctanttoadvocateonbehalfofblacksaccusedof crimes unless the lawyerswere convinced of themen’s innocence.6 Themajor exceptionwas anti-

deathpenaltyadvocacy.Overtheyears,civilrightslawyershavemadeheroiceffortstosavethelivesofcondemned criminals. But outside of the death penalty arena, civil rights advocates have long beenreluctanttoleaptothedefenseofaccusedcriminals.Advocateshavefoundtheyaremostsuccessfulwhenthey draw attention to certain types of black people (those who are easily understood bymainstreamwhites as “good”and“respectable”) and tell certain typesof stories about them.Since thedayswhenabolitionistsstruggledtoeradicateslavery,racialjusticeadvocateshavegonetogreatlengthstoidentifyblack people who defy racial stereotypes, and they have exercised considerable message discipline,tellingonlythosestoriesofracialinjusticethatwillevokesympathyamongwhites.AprimeexampleistheRosaParksstory.RosaParkswasnotthefirstpersontorefusetogiveupher

seatonasegregatedbus inMontgomery,Alabama.Civil rightsadvocatesconsideredandrejected twootherblackwomenasplaintiffswhenplanninga test casechallenging segregationpractices:ClaudetteColvin and Mary Louise Smith. Both of them were arrested for refusing to give up their seats onMontgomery’s segregated buses, just months before Rosa Parks refused to budge. Colvin was fifteenyears old when she defied segregation laws. Her case attracted national attention, but civil rightsadvocatesdeclined touseherasaplaintiffbecauseshegotpregnantbyanoldermanshortlyafterherarrest.Advocatesworried thather“immoral”conductwoulddetract fromorundermine theirefforts toshowthatblackswereentitledto(andworthyof)equaltreatment.Likewise,theydecidednottouseMaryLouiseSmithasaplaintiffbecauseherfatherwasrumoredtobeanalcoholic.Itwasunderstoodthat,inanyefforttochallengeracialdiscrimination,thelitigant—andeventhelitigant’sfamily—hadtobeabovereproachandfreefromeverynegativetraitthatcouldbeusedasajustificationforunequaltreatment.RosaParks,inthisregard,wasadreamcometrue.Shewas,inthewordsofJoAnnGibsonRobinson

(anotherkeyfigureintheMontgomeryBusBoycott),a“medium-sized,culturedmulattowoman;acivicandreligiousworker;quiet,unassuming,andpleasantinmannerandappearance;dignifiedandreserved;of high morals and strong character.”7 No one doubted that Parks was the perfect symbol for themovementtointegratepublictransportationinMontgomery.MartinLutherKingJr.recalledinhismemoirthat“Mrs.Parkswas idealfor theroleassignedtoherbyhistory,” largelybecause“hercharacterwasimpeccable”andshewas“oneofthemostrespectedpeopleintheNegrocommunity.”8The time-tested strategy of using those who epitomize moral virtue as symbols in racial justice

campaigns is farmoredifficult toemploy inefforts to reform thecriminal justicesystem.Mostpeoplewhoarecaughtupinthecriminaljusticesystemhavelessthanflawlessbackgrounds.Whilemanyblackpeoplegetstoppedandsearchedforcrimestheydidnotcommit,itisnotsoeasythesedaystofindyoungblackmeninurbanareaswhohaveneverbeenconvictedofacrime.Thenewcastesystemlabelsblackand brown men as criminals early, often in their teens, making them “damaged goods” from theperspectiveoftraditionalcivilrightsadvocates.Withcriminalrecords,themajorityofyoungblackmenin urban areas are not seen as attractive plaintiffs for civil rights litigation or good “poster boys” formediaadvocacy.Thewidespreadaversiontoadvocacyonbehalfofthoselabeledcriminalsreflectsacertainpolitical

reality. Many would argue that expending scarce resources on criminal justice reform is a strategicmistake.Afterall,criminalsaretheonesocialgroupinAmericathatnearlyeveryone—acrosspolitical,racial,andclassboundaries—feelsfreetohate.Whychampionthecauseofthedespisedwhenthereareso many sympathetic stories about racial injustice one could tell? Why draw public attention to the“worst”oftheblackcommunity,thoselabeledcriminals?Shouldn’twedirectscarceresourcestobattlesthataremoreeasilywon,suchasaffirmativeaction?Shouldn’twefocusthepublic’sattentionontheso-calledrootcausesofmassincarceration,suchaseducationalinequity?Wecancontinuealongthisroad—itisaroadwelltravelled—butwemustadmitthestrategyhasnot

mademuchofadifference.AfricanAmericans,asagroup,arenobetteroff than theywere in1968 inmanyrespects.9Infact,tosomeextent,theyareworseoff.Whentheincarceratedpopulationiscountedin

unemploymentandpovertyrates,thebestoftimesfortherestofAmericahavebeenamongtheworstoftimesforAfricanAmericans,particularlyblackmen.AssociologistBruceWesternhasshown,thenotionthatthe1990s—theClintonyears—weregoodtimesforAfricanAmericans,andthat“arisingtideliftsallboats,”ispurefiction.Asunemploymentratessanktohistoricallylowlevelsinthelate1990sforthegeneralpopulation,joblessratesamongnoncollegeblackmenintheirtwentiesrosetotheirhighestlevelsever,propelledbyskyrocketingincarcerationrates.10Onereasonsomanypeoplehaveafalseimpressionoftheeconomicwell-beingofAfricanAmericans,

as a group, is that poverty and unemployment statistics do not include people who are behind bars.Prisoners are literally erased from the nation’s economic picture, leading standard estimates tounderestimate the true jobless rate by asmuch as 24 percentage points for less-educated blackmen.11YoungAfricanAmericanmenweretheonlygrouptoexperienceasteepincreaseinjoblessnessbetween1980and2000,adevelopmentdirectlytraceabletotheincreaseinthepenalpopulation.Duringthemuchheraldedeconomicboomofthe1990s,thetruejoblessrateamongnoncollegeblackmenwasastaggering42percent(65percentamongblackmaledropouts).12Despite these inconvenient truths, though,wecanpresson.Wecancontinue to ignore those labeled

criminalsinourlitigationandmediaadvocacyandfocuspublicattentiononmoreattractiveplaintiffs—like innocent doctors and lawyers stopped and searched on freeways, innocent black and brownschoolchildren attending abysmal schools, or innocent middle-and upper-middle-class black childrenwho will be denied access to Harvard,Michigan, and Yale if affirmative action disappears.We cancontinueon thiswell-wornpath.But ifwedoso,weshould laborunderno illusions thatwewillendmass incarceration or shake the foundations of the current racial order.Wemay improve some schooldistricts, prolong affirmative action for another decade or two, or force some police departments tocondemn racial profiling, butwewill not put a dent in the prevailing caste system.Wemust face therealitiesofthenewcastesystemandembracethosewhoaremostoppressedbyitifwehopetoendthenewJimCrow.Thatsaid,noeffortismadeheretodescribe,inanydetail,whatshouldorshouldnotbedoneinthe

monthsandyearsaheadtochallengethenewcastesystem.Suchanundertakingisbeyondthescopeofthisbook. The aim of this chapter is simply to reflect onwhether traditional approaches to racial justiceadvocacyareadequatetothetaskathand.Whatfollowsisnotaplan,butseveralquestionsandclaimsofferedforseriousconsiderationbythosecommittedtoracialjusticeandinterestedindismantlingmassincarceration. They are offered as conversation starters—food for thought, debate, and—I hope—collectiveaction.Eachisachallengetoconventionalwisdomortraditionalstrategies.Farmoreshouldbesaidabouteachpointmade,but,asindicated,thisismeanttobethebeginningofaconversation,notanend.

TinkeringIsforMechanics,NotRacialJusticeAdvocates

Thefirstandarguablymost importantpoint is thatcriminal justicereformefforts—standingalone—arefutile.Gainscanbemade,yes,butthenewcastesystemwillnotbeoverthrownbyisolatedvictoriesinlegislaturesorcourtrooms.Ifyoudoubtthisisthecase,considerthesheerscaleofmassincarceration.Ifwe hope to return to the rate of incarceration of the 1970s—a time when many civil rights activistsbelieved ratesof imprisonmentwereegregiouslyhigh—wewouldneed to releaseapproximately fouroutoffivepeoplecurrentlybehindbarstoday.13PrisonswouldhavetobeclosedacrossAmerica,aneventthatwouldlikelyinspirepanicinruralcommunitiesthathavebecomedependentonprisonsforjobsandeconomicgrowth.Hundredsofthousandsofpeople—manyofthemunionized—wouldlosetheirjobs.AsMarcMauerhasobserved, “Themore than700,000prisonand jail guards, administrators, serviceworkers,andotherpersonnelrepresentapotentiallypowerfulpoliticaloppositiontoanyscaling-downofthesystem.Oneneedonlyrecallthefierceoppositiontotheclosingofmilitarybasesinrecentyearstoseehowtheseforceswillfunctionovertime.”14Arguably,Mauerunderestimatesthescopeofthechallengebyfocusingnarrowlyontheprisonsystem,

ratherthancountingallofthepeopleemployedinthecriminaljusticebureaucracy.AccordingtoareportreleasedbytheU.S.DepartmentofJustice’sBureauofStatisticsin2006, theU.S.spentarecord$185billionforpoliceprotection,detention,judicial,andlegalactivitiesin2003.Adjustingforinflation,thesefigures reflect a tripling of justice expenditures since 1982. The justice system employed almost 2.4millionpeoplein2003—58percentofthematthelocalleveland31percentatthestatelevel.Iffouroutoffivepeoplewerereleasedfromprisons,farmorethanamillionpeoplecouldlosetheirjobs.There is also the private-sector investment to consider. Prisons are big business and have become

deeply entrenched in America’s economic and political system. Rich and powerful people, includingformer Vice President Dick Cheney, have invested millions in private prisons.15 They are deeplyinterested in expanding the market—increasing the supply of prisoners—not eliminating the pool ofpeoplewhocanbeheldcaptiveforaprofit.The2005annualreportfortheCorrectionsCorporationofAmericaexplainedthevestedinterestsofprivateprisonsmatter-of-factlyinafilingwiththeSecuritiesandExchangeCommission:

Ourgrowthisgenerallydependentuponourabilitytoobtainnewcontractstodevelopandmanagenewcorrectionalanddetentionfacilities.Thispossiblegrowthdependsonanumberoffactorswecannotcontrol,includingcrimeratesandsentencingpatternsinvariousjurisdictionsandacceptanceof privatization. The demand for our facilities and services could be adversely affected by therelaxation of enforcement efforts, leniency in conviction and sentencing practices or through thedecriminalization of certain activities that are currently proscribed by our criminal laws. Forinstance,anychangeswithrespect todrugsandcontrolledsubstancesorillegal immigrationcouldaffectthenumberofpersonsarrested,convictedandsentenced,therebypotentiallyreducingdemandforcorrectionalfacilitiestohousethem.16

AmericanCorrectionalAssociationPresidentGwendolynChunnputthemattermorebluntlythatsameyearwhenlamentingthat theunprecedentedprisonexpansionboomofthe1990sseemedtobelevelingoff.“We’llhaveahardtimeholdingontowhatwehavenow,”shelamented.17Asitturnsout,herfearswereunfounded.Althoughprisongrowthappeared tobeslowing in2005, themarket forprisonershascontinuedtoexpand.Thenation’sprisonpopulationbrokenewrecordsin2008,withnoendinsight.Thenonprofit PEWCharitable Trusts reports that inmate populations in at least ten states are expected toincreaseby25percentormorebetween2006and2011.Inshort,themarketforprivateprisonsisasgoodas it has ever been. Damon Hininger, the president and chief operations officer of Corrections

CorporationofAmerica,thelargestprivate-prisonoperatorintheUnitedStates,isthoroughlyoptimistic.His company boosted net income by 14 percent in 2008, and he fully expects the growth to continue.“Thereisgoingtobealargeropportunityforusinthefuture,”hesaid.18Evenbeyondprivateprisoncompanies,awhole rangeofprisonprofiteersmustbe reckonedwith if

mass incarceration is to be undone, including phone companies that gouge families of prisoners bycharging themexorbitant rates tocommunicatewith their lovedones;gunmanufacturers that sellTaserguns,rifles,andpistolstoprisonguardsandpolice;privatehealthcareproviderscontractedbythestatetoprovide(typicallyabysmal)healthcaretoprisoners;theU.S.military,whichreliesonprisonlabortoprovidemilitarygeartosoldiersinIraq;corporationsthatuseprisonlabortoavoidpayingdecentwages;andthepoliticians,lawyers,andbankerswhostructuredealstobuildnewprisonsofteninpredominatelywhiteruralcommunities—dealsthatoftenpromisefarmoretolocalcommunitiesthantheydeliver.19Allof these corporate and political interests have a stake in the expansion—not the elimination—of thesystemofmassincarceration.Consideralsothelengthyto-dolistforreformers.Ifwebecomeseriousaboutdismantlingthesystemof

massincarceration,wemustendtheWaronDrugs.Thereisnowayaroundit.Thedrugwarislargelyresponsiblefortheprisonboomandthecreationofthenewundercaste,andthereisnopathtoliberationforcommunitiesofcolorthatincludesthisongoingwar.Solongaspeopleofcoloringhettocommunitiesarebeingroundedupbythethousandsfordrugoffenses,cartedoff toprisons,andthenreleasedintoapermanentundercaste,massincarcerationasasystemofcontrolwillcontinuetofunctionwell.Endingthedrugwarisnosimpletask,however.Itcannotbeaccomplishedthroughalandmarkcourt

decision,anexecutiveorder,orsinglestrokeofthepresidentialpen.Since1982,thewarhasragedlikeaforestfiresetwithafewmatchesandagallonofgasoline.Whatbeganasanaudaciousfederalprogram,hasspreadtoeverystateinthenationandnearlyeverycity.Ithasinfectedlawenforcementactivitiesonroads, sidewalks, highways, train stations, airports, and the nation’s border. The war has effectivelyshredded portions of the U.S. Constitution—eliminating Fourth Amendment protections once deemedinviolate—and it has militarized policing practices in inner cities across America. Racially targeteddrug-law enforcement practices taken together with laws that specifically discriminate against drugoffendersinemployment,housing,andpublicbenefitshaverelegatedthemajorityofblackmeninurbanareasacrosstheUnitedStatestoapermanentsecond-classstatus.Ifwehopetoendthissystemofcontrol,wecannotbesatisfiedwithahandfulofreforms.Allofthe

financialincentivesgrantedtolawenforcementtoarrestpoorblackandbrownpeoplefordrugoffensesmust be revoked. Federal grant money for drug enforcement must end; drug forfeiture laws must bestripped from the books; racial profiling must be eradicated; the concentration of drug busts in poorcommunitiesofcolormustcease;andthetransferofmilitaryequipmentandaidtolocallawenforcementagencieswagingthedrugwarmustcometoascreechinghalt.Andthat’sjustforstarters.Equally important, theremust be a changewithin the culture of law enforcement. Black and brown

peopleinghettocommunitiesmustnolongerbeviewedasthedesignatedenemy,andghettocommunitiesmust no longer be treated like occupied zones.Law enforcementmust adopt a compassionate, humaneapproach to theproblemsof theurbanpoor—anapproach thatgoesbeyondtherhetoricof“communitypolicing”toamethodofengagementthatpromotestrust,healing,andgenuinepartnership.Datacollectionfor police and prosecutors should bemandated nationwide to ensure that selective enforcement is nolongertakingplace.Racialimpactstatementsthatassesstheracialandethnicimpactofcriminaljusticelegislationmustbeadopted.20Publicdefenderofficesshouldbefundedatthesamelevelasprosecutor’sofficestoeliminatetheunfairadvantageaffordedtheincarcerationmachine.Thelistgoeson:Mandatorydrug sentencing lawsmust be rescinded.Marijuana ought to be legalized (and perhaps other drugs aswell).Meaningfulreentryprogramsmustbeadopted—programsthatprovideapathwaynotjusttodead-end, minimum-wage jobs, but also training and education so those labeled criminals can realistically

reach forhigh-paying jobs andviable, rewardingcareerpaths.Prisonworkers shouldbe retrained forjobsandcareersthatdonotinvolvecaginghumanbeings.DrugtreatmentondemandmustbeprovidedforallAmericans,afarbetterinvestmentoftaxpayermoneythanprisoncellsfordrugoffenders.Barrierstoreentry, specifically themyriad laws that operate to discriminate against drugoffenders for the rest oftheirlivesineveryaspectoftheirsocial,economic,andpoliticallife,mustbeeliminated.The list couldgoon,of course, but thepointhasbeenmade.The central question for racial justice

advocates is this: are we serious about ending this system of control, or not? If we are, there is atremendous amount of work to be done. The notion that all of these reforms can be accomplishedpiecemeal—oneatatime,throughdisconnectedadvocacystrategies—seemsdeeplymisguided.Alloftheneededreformshave less todowithfailedpolicies thanadeeplyflawedpublicconsensus,one that isindifferent,atbest,totheexperienceofpoorpeopleofcolor.AsMartinLutherKingJr.explainedbackin1965,whendescribingwhyitwasfarmoreimportanttoengageinmassmobilizationsthanfilelawsuits,“We’retryingtowintherighttovoteandwehavetofocustheattentionoftheworldonthat.Wecan’tdothat making legal cases. We have to make the case in the court of public opinion.”21 King certainlyappreciated the contributions of civil rights lawyers (he relied on them to get him out of jail), but heopposed the tendencyofcivil rights lawyers to identifyahandfulof individualswhocouldmakegreatplaintiffs in a court of law, then file isolated cases.Hebelievedwhatwasnecessarywas tomobilizethousandstomaketheircaseinthecourtofpublicopinion.Inhisview,itwasaflawedpublicconsensus—notmerelyflawedpolicy—thatwasattherootofracialoppression.Today,nolessthanfiftyyearsago,aflawedpublicconsensusliesatthecoreoftheprevailingcaste

system. When people think about crime, especially drug crime, they do not think about suburbanhousewivesviolatinglawsregulatingprescriptiondrugsorwhitefratboysusingecstasy.Drugcrimeinthiscountryisunderstoodtobeblackandbrown,anditisbecausedrugcrimeisraciallydefinedinthepublicconsciousnessthattheelectoratehasnotcaredmuchwhathappenstodrugcriminals—atleastnottheway theywouldhavecared if thecriminalswereunderstood tobewhite. It is this failure to care,reallycareacrosscolorlines,thatliesatthecoreofthissystemofcontrolandeveryracialcastesystemthathasexistedintheUnitedStatesoranywhereelseintheworld.Thosewhobelievethatadvocacychallengingmassincarcerationcanbesuccessfulwithoutoverturning

the public consensus that gave rise to it are engaging in fanciful thinking, a form of denial. Isolatedvictories can bewon—even a string of victories—but in the absence of a fundamental shift in publicconsciousness, thesystemasawholewill remain intact.To theextent thatmajorchangesareachievedwithoutacompleteshift,thesystemwillrebound.Thecastesystemwillreemergeinanewform,justasconvictleasingreplacedslavery,oritwillbereborn,justasmassincarcerationreplacedJimCrow.SociologistsMichaelOmiandHowardWinantmakeasimilarpointintheirbookRacialFormationin

theUnitedStates.Theyattributethecyclicalnatureofracialprogresstothe“unstableequilibrium”thatcharacterizes theUnitedStates’ racialorder.22Under“normal”conditions, theyargue, state institutionsare able to normalize the organization and enforcement of the prevailing racial order, and the systemfunctions relatively automatically. Challenges to the racial order during these periods are easilymarginalizedorsuppressed,and theprevailingsystemof racialmeanings, identity,and ideologyseems“natural.” These conditions clearly prevailed during slavery and Jim Crow.When the equilibrium isdisrupted,however,as inReconstructionandtheCivilRightsMovement, thestateinitiallyresists, thenattemptstoabsorbthechallengethroughaseriesofreforms“thatare,ifnotentirelysymbolic,atleastnotcriticaltotheoperationoftheracialorder.”Intheabsenceofatrulyegalitarianracialconsensus,thesepredictablecyclesinevitablygiverisetonew,extraordinarilycomprehensivesystemsofracializedsocialcontrol.Oneexampleofthewayinwhichawellestablishedracialordereasilyabsorbslegalchallengesisthe

infamous aftermath of theBrown v. Board of Education decision. After the Supreme Court declared

separate schools inherently unequal in 1954, segregation persisted unabated. One commentator notes:“The statistics from theSouthern states are truly amazing.For ten years, 1954-1964, virtuallynothinghappened.”23 Not a single black child attended an integrated public grade school in South Carolina,Alabama,orMississippiasofthe1962-1963schoolyear.AcrosstheSouthasawhole,amere1percentof black school childrenwere attending school withwhites in 1964—a full decade afterBrown wasdecided.24BrowndidnotendJimCrow;amassmovementhadtoemergefirst—onethataimedtocreateanew public consensus opposed to the evils of Jim Crow. This does not mean Brown v. Board wasmeaningless, as somecommentatorshave claimed.25Brown gave critical legitimacy to the demands ofcivilrightsactivistswhoriskedtheir livestoendJimCrow,andithelpedtoinspirethemovement(aswellasafiercebacklash).26Butstandingalone,BrownaccomplishedforAfricanAmericanslittlemorethanAbrahamLincoln’sEmancipationProclamation.Acivilwarhadtobewagedtoendslavery;amassmovementwasnecessarytobringaformalendtoJimCrow.Thosewhoimaginethatfarlessisrequiredtodismantlemassincarcerationandbuildanew,egalitarianracialconsensusreflectingacompassionateratherthanpunitiveimpulsetowardpoorpeopleofcolorfailtoappreciatethedistancebetweenMartinLutherKingJr.’sdreamandtheongoingracialnightmareforthoselockedupandlockedoutofAmericansociety.Theforegoingshouldnotbereadasacallformovementbuildingtotheexclusionofreformwork.To

the contrary, reformwork is the work ofmovement building, provided that it is done consciously asmovement-building work. If all the reforms mentioned above were actually adopted, a radicaltransformationinoursocietywouldhavetakenplace.Therelevantquestionisnotwhethertoengageinreformwork,buthow.Thereisnoshortageofworthyreformeffortsandgoals.Differencesofopinionareinevitableaboutwhichreformsaremostimportantandinwhatorderofprioritytheyshouldbepursued.Thesedebatesareworthwhile,but it iscritical tokeep inmind that thequestionofhowwedoreformworkisevenmoreimportantthanthespecificreformsweseek.Ifthewaywepursuereformsdoesnotcontribute to the building of a movement to dismantle the system of mass incarceration, and if ouradvocacydoesnotupsettheprevailingpublicconsensusthatsupportsthenewcastesystem,noneofthereforms,evenifwon,willsuccessfullydisruptthenation’sracialequilibrium.Challengestothesystemwillbeeasilyabsorbedordeflected,andtheaccommodationsmadewillserveprimarilytolegitimatethesystem,notundermineit.Weruntheriskofwinningisolatedbattlesbutlosingthelargerwar.

Let’sTalkAboutRace—ResistingtheTemptationofColorblindAdvocacy

Sohowshouldwegoaboutbuildingthismovementtoendmassincarceration?Whatshouldbethecorephilosophy, the guiding principles? Another book could be written on this subject, but a few keyprinciplesstandoutthatcanbebrieflyexploredhere.Theseprinciplesarerootedinanunderstandingthatanymovementtoendmassincarcerationmustdealwithmassincarcerationasaracialcastesystem,notasasystemofcrimecontrol.This isnot tosaycrime isunimportant; it isvery important.Weneed aneffective system of crime prevention and control in our communities, but that is not what the currentsystem is. This system is better designed to create crime, and a perpetual class of people labeledcriminals,ratherthantoeliminatecrimeorreducethenumberofcriminals.It isnotuncommon,however, tohearpeopleclaim that themere fact thatwehave the lowestcrime

rates,atthesametimethatwehavethehighestincarcerationrates,isalltheproofneededthatthissystemworkswell to control crime. But if you believe this system effectively controls crime, consider this:standardestimatesoftheamountofcrimereductionthatcanbeattributabletomassincarcerationrangefrom 3 to 25 percent.27 Some scholars believe we have long since passed a tipping point where thedecliningmarginalreturnonimprisonmenthasdippedbelowzero.Imprisonment, theysay,nowcreatesfarmorecrimethanitprevents,byrippingapartfragilesocialnetworks,destroyingfamilies,andcreatinga permanent class of unemployables. 28Although it is common to think of poverty and joblessness asleading to crime and imprisonment, this research suggests that theWar onDrugs is amajor cause ofpoverty,chronicunemployment,broken families, andcrime today.Butevenassuming25percent is theright figure, it still means that the overwhelming majority of incarceration—75 percent—has hadabsolutely no impact on crime, despite costing nearly $200 billion annually. As a crime reductionstrategy,massincarcerationisanabysmalfailure.Itislargelyineffectiveandextraordinarilyexpensive.Saying mass incarceration is an abysmal failure makes sense, though, only if one assumes that the

criminaljusticesystemisdesignedtopreventandcontrolcrime.Butifmassincarcerationisunderstoodasasystemofsocialcontrol—specifically, racialcontrol—then thesystemisa fantasticsuccess.29 Inlessthantwodecades,theprisonpopulationquadrupled,andlargemajoritiesofpoorpeopleofcolorinurbanareasthroughouttheUnitedStateswereplacedunderthecontrolofthecriminaljusticesystemorsaddled with criminal records for life. Almost overnight, huge segments of ghetto communities werepermanentlyrelegatedtoasecond-classstatus,disenfranchised,andsubjectedtoperpetualsurveillanceand monitoring by law enforcement agencies. One could argue this result is a tragic, unforeseeablemistake,andthatthegoalwasalwayscrimecontrol,notthecreationofaracialundercaste.ButjudgingbythepoliticalrhetoricandthelegalrulesemployedintheWaronDrugs,thisresultisnofreakaccident.In order tomake this point,weneed to talk about race openly andhonestly.Wemust stopdebating

crimepolicyasthoughitwerepurelyaboutcrime.Peoplemustcometounderstandtheracialhistoryandoriginsofmassincarceration—themanywaysourconsciousandunconsciousbiaseshavedistortedourjudgmentsover theyearsaboutwhat isfair,appropriate,andconstructivewhenrespondingtodruguseanddrugcrime.Wemustcome tosee, too,howoureconomic insecuritiesand racial resentmentshavebeenexploitedforpoliticalgain,andhowthismanipulationhascausedsufferingforpeopleofallcolors.Finally,wemustadmit,outloud,thatitwasbecauseofracethatwedidn’tcaremuchwhathappenedto“those people” and imagined theworst possible things about them.The fact that our lack of care andconcernmayhavebeen,attimes,unintentionalorunconsciousdoesnotmitigateourcrime—ifwerefuse,whengiventhechance,tomakeamends.Admittedly,though,thetemptationtoignoreraceinouradvocacymaybeoverwhelming.Racemakes

peopleuncomfortable.Onestudyfoundthatsomewhitesaresoloathtotalkaboutraceandsofearfulofviolatingracialetiquettethattheyindicateapreferenceforavoidingallcontactwithblackpeople.30The

strikingreluctanceofwhites,inparticular,totalkaboutorevenacknowledgeracehasledmanyscholarsand advocates to conclude that we would be better off not talking about race at all. This view isbuttressedbythefactthatwhiteliberals,nearlyasmuchasconservatives,seemtohavelostpatiencewithdebatesabout racialequity.BarackObamanoted thisphenomenon inhisbook,TheAudacityofHope:“Rightly orwrongly,white guilt has largely exhausted itself inAmerica; even themost fair-mindedofwhites,thosewhowouldgenuinelyliketoseeracialinequalityendedandpovertyrelieved,tendtopushbackagainstracialvictimization—orrace-specificclaimsbasedonthehistoryofracediscriminationinthiscountry.”Addingtothetemptationtoavoidraceisthefactthatopportunitiesforchallengingmassincarceration

onpurelyrace-neutralgroundshaveneverbeengreater.Withbudgetsbusting,morethantwodozenstateshave reduced or eliminated harshmandatoryminimum sentences, restored early-release programs, andofferedtreatmentinsteadofincarcerationforsomedrugoffenders.31Thefinancialcrisisengulfingstateslargeandsmallhasledtoaconversionamongsomelegislatorswhooncewere“gettough”truebelievers.Decliningcrimerates,coupledwithadeclineinpublicconcernaboutcrime,havealsohelpedtocreatearareopeningforaproductivepublicconversationabouttheWaronDrugs.Apromisingindicatorofthepublic’sreceptivitytoachangeincourseisCalifornia’sProposition36,whichmandateddrugtreatmentrather than jail for first-timeoffenders,andwasapprovedbymore than60percentof theelectorate in2000.32Somestateshavedecriminalizedmarijuana, includingMassachusetts,where65percentofstatevoters approved themeasure.33 Taken together, these factors suggest that, if a major mobilization gotunderway, impressive changes in our nation’s drug laws and policieswould be not only possible, butlikely,withouteversayingawordaboutrace.This is temptingbait, toput itmildly,but racial justiceadvocates shouldnot take it.Theprevailing

castesystemcannotbesuccessfullydismantledwithapurelyrace-neutralapproach.Tobeginwith,itisextremelyunlikely thatastrategybasedpurelyoncosts,crimerates,and thewisdomofdrug treatmentwillgetusbackeventothetroublingincarcerationratesofthe1970s.Asindicatedearlier,anyefforttodownsize dramatically our nation’s prisonswould inspire fierce resistance by those facedwith losingjobs,investments,andotherbenefitsprovidedbythecurrentsystem.Theemotionandhighanxietywouldlikely express itself in the form of a racially charged debate about values, morals, and personalresponsibility rather than a debate about the prison economy.Fewwouldopenly argue thatwe shouldlock upmillions of poor people just so that other people can have jobs or get a good return on theirprivate investments. Instead,familiarargumentswouldlikelyresurfaceabout theneedtobe“tough”oncriminals,notcoddlethemorgive“freepasses.”Thepublicdebatewouldinevitablyturntorace,evenifnoonewasexplicitlytalkingaboutit.Ashistoryhasshown,theprevalenceofpowerful(unchallenged)racial stereotypes, together with widespread apprehension regarding major structural changes, wouldcreateapoliticalenvironmentinwhichimplicitracialappealscouldbeemployed,onceagain,withgreatsuccess. Failure to anticipate and preempt such appealswould set the stage for the same divide-and-conquertacticsthathavereliablypreservedracialhierarchyintheUnitedStatesforcenturies.Even if fairly dramatic changes were achieved while ignoring race, the results would be highly

contingent and temporary. If andwhen the economy improves, the justification for a “softer” approachwouldnolongerexist.Stateswouldlikelygravitatebacktotheiroldwaysifanew,morecompassionatepublicconsensusaboutracehadnotbeenforged.Similarly,ifandwhencrimeratesrise—whichseemslikelyifthenation’seconomycontinuestosour—nothingwoulddeterpoliticiansfrommakingblackandbrown criminals, once again, their favoritewhipping boys. Since the days of slavery, blackmen havebeendepictedandunderstoodascriminals,andtheircriminal“nature”hasbeenamongthejustificationsforeverycastesystemtodate.ThecriminalizationanddemonizationofblackmenisonehabitAmericaseemsunlikelytobreakwithoutaddressinghead-ontheracialdynamicsthathavegivenrisetosuccessivecastesystems.Althoughcolorblindapproachestoaddressingtheproblemsofpoorpeopleofcoloroften

seempragmaticintheshortrun,inthelongruntheyarecounterproductive.Colorblindness,thoughwidelytoutedasthesolution,isactuallytheproblem.

AgainstColorblindness

Saying thatcolorblindness is theproblemmayalarmsomein thecivil rightscommunity,especially thepollstersandpoliticalconsultantswhohavebecomeincreasinglyinfluentialincivilrightsadvocacy.Fordecades, civil rights leaders have been saying things like “we all want a colorblind society, we justdisagreehowtoget there” indefenseofrace-consciousprogramslikeaffirmativeactionorracialdatacollection.34Affirmativeactionhasbeenframedasalegitimateexceptiontothecolorblindnessprinciple—a principle now endorsed by the overwhelming majority of the American electorate. Civil rightsleadersarequicktoassurethepublicthatwhenwereachacolorblindnirvana,raceconsciousnesswillnolongerbenecessaryorappropriate.Farfrombeingaworthygoal,however,colorblindnesshasprovedcatastrophicforAfricanAmericans.

ItisnotanoverstatementtosaythesystematicmassincarcerationofpeopleofcolorintheUnitedStateswouldnothavebeenpossibleinthepost-civilrightseraifthenationhadnotfallenunderthespellofacallouscolorblindness.Theseeminglyinnocentphrase,“Idon’tcareifhe’sblack...”perfectlycapturestheperversionofMartinLutherKing Jr.’s dream thatwemay,oneday, be able to seebeyond race toconnect spiritually across racial lines. Saying that one does not care about race is offered as anexculpatoryvirtue,wheninfactitcanbeaformofcruelty.Itispreciselybecausewe,asanation,havenotcaredmuchaboutAfricanAmericans thatwehaveallowedourcriminal justice system tocreateanewracialundercaste.Thedeeplyflawednatureofcolorblindness,asagoverningprinciple,isevidencedbythefactthatthe

public consensus supporting mass incarceration is officially colorblind. It purports to see black andbrownmennot as black andbrown, but simply asmen—racelessmen—whohave failedmiserably toplayby the rules the restofus followquitenaturally.The fact that somanyblackandbrownmenareroundedupfordrugcrimesthatgolargelyignoredwhencommittedbywhitesisunseen.Ourcollectivecolorblindnessprevents us from seeing this basic fact.Ourblindness alsoprevents us from seeing theracial and structural divisions that persist in society: the segregated, unequal schools, the segregated,jobless ghettos, and the segregated public discourse—a public conversation that excludes the currentpariah caste. Our commitment to colorblindness extends beyond individuals to institutions and socialarrangements.Wehavebecomeblind,notsomuchtorace,buttotheexistenceofracialcasteinAmerica.Morethanforty-fiveyearsago,MartinLutherKingJr.warnedofthisdanger.Heinsistedthatblindness

and indifference to racial groups is actually more important than racial hostility to the creation andmaintenance of racialized systems of control.Thosewho supported slavery and JimCrow, he argued,typicallywerenotbadorevilpeople;theywerejustblind.EventheJusticeswhodecidedtheinfamousDredScott case,which ruled “that theNegrohasno rightswhich thewhiteman is bound to respect,”werenotwickedmen,hesaid.Onthecontrary,theyweredecentanddedicatedmen.But,hehastenedtoadd, “They were victims of a spiritual and intellectual blindness. They knew not what they did. Thewholesystemofslaverywaslargelyperpetuatedthroughspirituallyignorantpersons.”Hecontinued:

Thistragicblindnessisalsofoundinracialsegregation,thenot-too-distantcousinofslavery.Someof the most vigorous defenders of segregation are sincere in their beliefs and earnest in theirmotives. Although some men are segregationists merely for reasons of political expediency andpoliticalgain,notallof theresistance to integration is therearguardofprofessionalbigots.Somepeoplefeelthattheirattempttopreservesegregationisbestforthemselves,theirchildren,andtheirnation.Manyaregoodchurchpeople,anchoredinthereligiousfaithoftheirmothersandfathers....Whata tragedy!MillionsofNegroeshavebeencrucifiedbyconscientiousblindness.... Jesuswasright about thosemenwhocrucifiedhim.Theyknewnotwhat theydid.Theywere inflictedbyaterribleblindness.35

Couldnotthesamespeechbegivenaboutmassincarcerationtoday?Again,AfricanAmericanshavebeen“crucifiedbyconscientiousblindness.”Peopleofgoodwillhavebeenunwillingtoseeblackandbrownmen, in their humanness, as entitled to the same care, compassion, and concern that would beextendedtoone’sfriends,neighbors,orlovedones.Kingrecognizedthatitwasthisindifference to theplightofother races thatsupported the institutionsofslaveryandJimCrow. Inhiswords,“Oneof thegreattragediesofman’slongtrekalongthehighwayofhistoryhasbeenthelimitingofneighborlyconcernto tribe, race, class or nation.” The consequence of this narrow, insular attitude “is that one does notreallymindwhathappenstothepeopleoutsidehisgroup.”36Racialindifferenceandblindness—farmorethanracialhostility—formthesturdyfoundationforallracialcastesystems.Abandoning the quest for a colorblind society is easier said than done, of course. Racial justice

advocates, if they should choose this path, will be required to provide uncomfortable answers tocommonlyaskedquestions.Forexample,advocatesarefrequentlyasked,Whenwillwe(finally)becomea colorblind society?The pursuit of colorblindnessmakes people impatient.With courage,we shouldrespond:Hopefullynever.Orif thosewordsaretoodifficult toutter, thensay:“Notintheforeseeablefuture.”Morethanalittlepatiencewillbeneededwhenexplainingthecompleteabout-face.Probablyaround

the same number of people think the Earth is flat as think race consciousness should be the rule inperpetuity,ratherthantheexception.Itwouldbeamistake,though,toassumethatpeopleareincapableofembracingapermanentcommitmenttocolorconsciousness.Theshiftmay,infact,comeassomethingofarelief,asitmovesourcollectivefocusawayfromawhollyunrealisticgoaltoonethatiswithinanyone’sreachrightnow.Afterall,toaspiretocolorblindnessistoaspiretoastateofbeinginwhichyouarenotcapableofseeingracialdifference—apracticalimpossibilityformostofus.Theshiftalsoinvitesamoreoptimistic view of human capacity. The colorblindness ideal is premised on the notion that we, as asociety, can never be trusted to see race and treat each other fairly or with genuine compassion. Acommitmenttocolorconsciousness,bycontrast,placesfaithinourcapacityashumanstoshowcareandconcernforothers,evenaswearefullycognizantofraceandpossibleracialdifferences.Ifcolorblindnessissuchabadidea,though,whyhavepeopleacrossthepoliticalspectrumbecomeso

attachedtoit?Forconservatives,theidealofcolorblindnessislinkedtoacommitmenttoindividualism.Intheirview,societyshouldbeconcernedwithindividuals,notgroups.Grossracialdisparitiesinhealth,wealth,education,andopportunityshouldbeofnointeresttoourgovernment,andracialidentityshouldbeaprivatematter,somethingbestkepttoourselves.Forliberals,theidealofcolorblindnessislinkedtothedreamofracialequality.Thehopeisthatonedaywewillnolongerseeracebecauseracewillloseall of its significance. In this fantasy, eventually racewill no longer be a factor inmortality rates, thespreadofdisease,educationaloreconomicopportunity,orthedistributionofwealth.Racewillcorrelatewith nothing; it will mean nothing; we won’t even notice it anymore. Those who are less idealisticembracecolorblindnesssimplybecause theyfinditdifficult to imagineasociety inwhichweseeraceandracialdifferencesyetconsistentlyactinapositive,constructiveway.Itiseasiertoimagineaworldinwhichwetolerateracialdifferencesbybeingblindtothem.Theuncomfortable truth,however, is that racialdifferenceswillalways exist amongus.Even if the

legaciesofslavery,JimCrow,andmass incarcerationwerecompletelyovercome,wewouldremainanation of immigrants in a larger world divided by race and ethnicity. It is a world in which there isextraordinary racial and ethnic inequality, and our nation has porous boundaries. For the foreseeablefuture,racialandethnicinequalitywillbeafeatureofAmericanlife.Thisrealityisnotcausefordespair.Theideathatwemayneverreachastateofperfectracialequality

—aperfectracialequilibrium—isnotcauseforalarm.Whatisconcerningistherealpossibilitythatwe,asasociety,willchoosenottocare.Wewillchoosetobeblindtoinjusticeandthesufferingofothers.

Wewilllooktheotherwayanddenyourpublicagenciestheresources,data,andtoolstheyneedtosolveproblems.Wewillrefusetocelebratewhatisbeautifulaboutourdistinctculturesandhistories,evenasweblendandevolve.Thatiscausefordespair.Seeingraceisnottheproblem.Refusingtocareforthepeopleweseeistheproblem.Thefactthatthe

meaningof racemayevolveover timeor losemuchof its significance ishardlya reason tobe struckblind.Weshouldhopenotforacolorblindsocietybutinsteadforaworldinwhichwecanseeeachotherfully, learn fromeachother, anddowhatwecan to respond toeachotherwith love.ThatwasKing’sdream—asocietythatiscapableofseeingeachofus,asweare,withlove.Thatisagoalworthfightingfor.

TheRacialBribe—Let’sGiveItBack

Theforegoingcouldbereadasaringingendorsementofaffirmativeactionandotherdiversityinitiatives.Toacertainextent,itis.Itisdifficulttoimagineatime,intheforeseeablefuture,whenthefreemarketandpartisanpoliticscouldbetrustedtoproduceequitableinclusioninallfacetsofAmericanpolitical,economic,andsociallife,withoutanyonegivinganythought—caringatall—aboutrace.Itmayalwaysbenecessaryforus,asasociety,topaycarefulattentiontotheimpactofourlaws,policies,andpracticesonracial and ethnic groups and consciously strive to ensure that biases, stereotypes, and structuralarrangements do not cause unnecessary harm or suffering to any individual or any group for reasonsrelatedtorace.Thereis,however,amajorcaveat.Racialjusticeadvocatesshouldconsider,withadegreeofcandor

thathasnotyetbeenevident,whetheraffirmativeaction—asithasbeenframedanddefendedduringthepastthirtyyears—hasfunctionedmorelikearacialbribethanatoolofracialjustice.Onemightwonder,whatdoesaffirmativeactionhavetodowithmassincarceration?Well,perhapsthetwoarelinkedmorethanwerealize.Weshouldaskourselveswhethereffortstoachieve“cosmetic”racialdiversity—thatis,reformeffortsthatmakeinstitutionslookgoodonthesurfacewithouttheneededstructuralchanges—haveactuallyhelpedtofacilitatetheemergenceofmassincarcerationandinterferedwiththedevelopmentofamore compassionate race consciousness. In earlier chapters,wehave seen that throughoutournation’shistory,poorandworking-classwhiteshavebeenboughtoffbyracialbribes.Thequestionposedhereiswhether affirmative action has functioned similarly, offering relativelymeagermaterial advantages butsignificantpsychologicalbenefitstopeopleofcolor,inexchangefortheabandonmentofamoreradicalmovementthatpromisedtoalterthenation’seconomicandsocialstructure.Tobeclear:ThisisnotanargumentthataffirmativeactionpoliciesconflictwithKing’sdreamthatwe

mightonedaybe“judgedbythecontentofourcharacter,notthecolorofourskin.”Kinghimselfwouldhavealmostcertainlyendorsedaffirmativeactionasaremedy,atleastundersomecircumstances.Infact,King specifically statedonnumerousoccasions that hebelieved special—evenpreferential—treatmentfor African Americans may be warranted in light of their unique circumstances.37 And this is not anargument that affirmative action hasmade no difference in the lives of poor orworking-classAfricanAmericans—assomehaveclaimed.Firedepartments,policedepartments,andotherpublicagencieshavebeen transformed, at least in part, due to affirmative action.38 Finally, this is not an argument thataffirmative action should be reconsidered simply on the grounds that it is “unfair” towhitemen as agroup. The empirical evidence strongly supports the conclusion that declining wages, downsizing,deindustrialization,globalization,andcutbacksingovernmentservicesrepresentmuchgreaterthreatstothepositionofwhitementhanso-calledreversediscrimination.39Theargumentmadehereisalessfamiliarone.Itisnotwidelydebatedinthemainstreammediaor,for

thatmatter,incivilrightsorganizations.Theclaimisthatracialjusticeadvocatesshouldreconsiderthetraditionalapproachtoaffirmativeactionbecause(a)ithashelpedtorenderanewcastesystemlargelyinvisible;(b)ithashelpedtoperpetuatethemyththatanyonecanmakeitiftheytry;(c)ithasencouragedthe embrace of a “trickle down theory of racial justice”; (d) it has greatly facilitated the divide-and-conquertacticsthatgaverisetomassincarceration;and(e)ithasinspiredsuchpolarizationandmediaattentionthatthegeneralpublicnow(wrongly)assumesthataffirmativeactionisthemainbattlefrontinU.S.racerelations.Itmaynotbeeasyforthecivilrightscommunitytohaveacandidconversationaboutanyofthis.Civil

rightsorganizationsarepopulatedwithbeneficiariesofaffirmativeaction(likemyself)andtheirfriendsandallies.Endingaffirmativeactionarousesfearsofannihilation.Therealitythatsomanyofuswoulddisappearovernightfromcollegesanduniversitiesnationwideifaffirmativeactionwerebanned,andthat

ourchildrenandgrandchildrenmightnotfollowinourfootsteps,createsakindofpanicthatisdifficulttodescribe.Itmaybeanalogous,insomerespects,tothepaniconceexperiencedbypoorandworking-classwhites facedwith desegregation—the fear of a sudden demotion in the nation’s racial hierarchy.MariMatsuda and Charles Lawrence’s bookWeWon’t Go Back captures the determination of affirmative-actionbeneficiariesnottoallowtheclocktobeturnedbackonracialjustice,backtodaysofracialcasteinAmerica.Theproblem,ofcourse,isthatwearealreadythere.Affirmativeaction,particularlywhen it is justifiedon thegroundsofdiversity rather thanequity (or

remedy), masks the severity of racial inequality in America, leading to greatly exaggerated claims ofracial progress and overly optimistic assessments of the future for African Americans. Seeing blackpeople graduate from Harvard and Yale and become CEOs or corporate lawyers—not to mentionpresidentoftheUnitedStates—causesusalltomarvelatwhatalongwaywehavecome.Asrecentdatashows, however,much of black progress is amyth.Although someAfricanAmericans are doing verywell—enrolling in universities andgraduate schools at record rates thanks to affirmative action—as agroup, African Americans are doing no better than they were when Martin Luther King Jr. wasassassinatedand riots swept innercitiesacrossAmerica.Nearlyone-fourthofAfricanAmericans livebelowthepovertylinetoday,approximatelythesameasin1968.Thechildpovertyrateisactuallyhighertodaythanitwasthen.40UnemploymentratesinblackcommunitiesrivalthoseinThirdWorldcountries.Andthatiswithaffirmativeaction!Whenwepullbackthecurtainandtakealookatwhatourso-calledcolorblindsocietycreateswithout

affirmative action,we see a familiar social, political, and economic structure—the structure of racialcaste.Whenthosebehindbarsaretakenintoaccount,America’sinstitutionscontinuetocreatenearlyasmuch racial inequalityas existedduring JimCrow.41Our elite universities,whichnow look a lot likeAmerica,wouldwhitenovernightifaffirmativeactionsuddenlydisappeared.Onerecentstudyindicatesthat the elimination of race-based admissions policies would lead to a 63 percent decline in blackmatriculants at all law schools and a 90 percent decline at elite law schools.42 Sociologist StephenSteinberg describes the bleak reality this way: “Insofar as this black middle class is an artifact ofaffirmativeactionpolicy,itcannotbesaidtobetheresultofautonomousworkingsofmarketforces.Inotherwords,theblackmiddleclassdoesnotreflectaloweringofracistbarriersinoccupationssomuchas the opposite: racism is so entrenched that without government intervention there would be little‘progress’toboastabout.”43Inviewofallthis,wemustask,towhatextenthasaffirmativeactionhelpedusremainblindto,andin

denialabout, theexistenceofa racialundercaste?And towhatextenthave thebattlesoveraffirmativeactiondistractedus anddivertedcrucial resources andenergyaway fromdismantling the structuresofracialinequality?The predictable response is that civil rights advocates are as committed to challenging mass

incarcerationandotherformsofstructuralracismastheyaretopreservingaffirmativeaction.Butwhereistheevidenceofthis?Civilrightsactivistshavecreatedanationalmovementtosaveaffirmativeaction,complete with themarches, organizing, andmedia campaigns, as well as incessant strategymeetings,conferences,andlitigation.Whereisthemovementtoendmassincarceration?Forthatmatter,whereisthemovementforeducationalequity?Partoftheansweristhatitisfareasiertocreateamovementwhenthere is a sense of being under attack. It is also easier when a single policy is at issue, rather thansomethingasenormous(andseeminglyintractable)aseducationalinequityormassincarceration.Thosearedecentexplanations,but theyarenoexcuse.Try tellingasixteen-year-oldblackyouth inLouisianawhoisfacingadecadeinadultprisonandalifetimeofsocial,political,andeconomicexclusionthatyourcivilrightsorganizationisnotdoingmuchtoendtheWaronDrugs—butwouldheliketohearaboutallthegreat thingsthatarebeingdonetosaveaffirmativeaction?Thereisafundamentaldisconnecttoday

between the world of civil rights advocacy and the reality facing those trapped in the new racialundercaste.Thereisanother,moresinisterconsequenceofaffirmativeaction:thecarefullyengineeredappearance

ofgreatracialprogressstrengthensthe“colorblind”publicconsensusthatpersonalandculturaltraits,notstructuralarrangements,arelargelyresponsibleforthefactthatthemajorityofyoungblackmeninurbanareasacrosstheUnitedStatesarecurrentlyunderthecontrolofthecriminaljusticesystemorbrandedasfelons for life. In other words, affirmative action helps tomake the emergence of a new racial castesystemseemimplausible.Itcreatesanenvironmentinwhichitisreasonabletoask,howcansomethingakintoaracialcastesystemexistwhenpeoplelikeCondoleezzaRice,ColinPowell,andBarackObamaare capable of rising from next to nothing to the pinnacles ofwealth and power?How could a castesystemexist,inviewoftheblackmiddleclass?Thereare answers to thesequestions,but theyaredifficult to swallowwhenmillionsofAmericans

havedisplayedawillingnesstoelectablackmanpresidentoftheUnitedStates.Thetruth,however,isthis:farfromunderminingthecurrentsystemofcontrol,thenewcastesystemdepends,innosmallpart,onblackexceptionalism.Thecolorblindpublicconsensusthatsupportsthenewcastesysteminsiststhatraceno longermatters.Now thatAmericahasofficially embracedMartinLutherKing Jr.’s dream (byreducingittotheplatitude“thatweshouldbejudgedbythecontentofourcharacter,notthecolorofourskin”),themassincarcerationofpeopleofcolorcanbejustifiedonlytotheextentthattheplightofthoselockedupandlockedoutisunderstoodtobetheirchoice,nottheirbirthright.In short, mass incarceration is predicated on the notion that an extraordinary number of African

Americans(butnotall)havefreelychosenalifeofcrimeandthusbelongbehindbars.Abeliefthatallblacksbelonginjailwouldbeincompatiblewiththesocialconsensusthatwehave“movedbeyond”raceand that race is no longer relevant. But a widespread belief that amajority of black and brownmenunfortunatelybelonginjailiscompatiblewiththenewAmericancreed,providedthattheirimprisonmentcanbeinterpretedastheirownfault.Iftheprisonlabelimposedonthemcanbeblamedontheirculture,poorworkethic,oreven their families, thensociety isabsolvedof responsibility todoanythingabouttheircondition.Thisiswhereblackexceptionalismcomesin.Highlyvisibleexamplesofblacksuccessarecriticalto

themaintenanceofaracialcastesystemintheeraofcolorblindness.Blacksuccessstorieslendcredencetothenotionthatanyone,nomatterhowpoororhowblackyoumaybe,canmakeittothetop,ifonlyyoutry hard enough. These stories “prove” that race is no longer relevant.Whereas black success storiesundermined the logic of Jim Crow, they actually reinforce the system of mass incarceration. Massincarcerationdependsforitslegitimacyonthewidespreadbeliefthatallthosewhoappeartrappedatthebottomactuallychosetheirfate.Viewed from this perspective, affirmative actionno longer appears entirelyprogressive.So long as

somereadilyidentifiableAfricanAmericansaredoingwell,thesystemislargelyimmunizedfromracialcritique.PeoplelikeBarackObamawhoaretrulyexceptionalbyanystandards,alongwithotherswhohavebeengrantedexceptionalopportunities,legitimateasystemthatremainsfraughtwithracialbias—especiallywhen theyfail tochallenge,orevenacknowledge, theprevailing racialorder. In thecurrentera,whiteAmericans areoften eager to embrace tokenor exceptionalAfricanAmericans, particularlywhentheygooutoftheirwaynottotalkaboutraceorracialinequality.Affirmativeactionmaybecounterproductiveinyetanothersense:itlendscredencetoatrickle-down

theoryofracialjustice.Thenotionthatgivingarelativelysmallnumberofpeopleofcoloraccesstokeypositions or institutions will inevitably redound to the benefit of the larger group is belied by theevidence.ItalsoseemstodisregardMartinLutherKingJr.’ssternwarningsthatracialjusticerequiresthecompletetransformationofsocialinstitutionsandadramaticrestructuringofoureconomy,notsuperficialchangesthatcanpurchasedonthecheap.Kingarguedin1968,“Thechanges[thathaveoccurredtodate]

arebasicallyinthesocialandpoliticalareas;theproblemswenowface—providingjobs,betterhousingandbettereducationforthepoorthroughoutthecountry—willrequiremoneyfortheirsolution,afactthatmakesthosesolutionsallthemoredifficult.”44Heemphasizedthat“mostofthegainsofthepastdecadewere obtained at bargain prices,” for the desegregation of public facilities and the election andappointmentofafewblackofficialscostclosetonothing.“WhiteAmericamustrecognizethatjusticeforblackpeoplecannotbeachievedwithoutradicalchangesinthestructureofoursociety.Thecomfortable,theentrenched,theprivilegedcannotcontinuetotrembleattheprospectofchangeinthestatusquo.”45Against thisbackdrop,diversity-drivenaffirmativeactionprogramsseemtobe theepitomeofracial

justicepurchasedonthecheap.Theycreatetheappearanceofracialequitywithouttherealityanddosoatnogreatcost,withoutfundamentallyalteringanyofthestructuresthatcreateracialinequalityinthefirstplace. Perhaps the best illustration of this fact is that, thanks in part to affirmative action, policedepartmentsandlawenforcementagenciesnationwidehavecometolookmorelikeAmericathanever,atprecisely themoment that they havewaged awar on the ghetto poor and played a leading role in thesystematic mass incarceration of people of color. The color of police chiefs across the country haschanged,buttheroleofthepoliceinoursocietyhasnot.GeraldTorresandLaniGuinierofferasimilarcritiqueofaffirmativeactioninTheMiner’sCanary.

They point out that “conventional strategies for social change proceed as though a change in whoadministerspowerfundamentallyaffectsthestructureofpoweritself.”46Thisnarrowapproachtosocialchange is reflected in the justifications offered for affirmative action, most notably the claim that“previousoutsiders,oncegivenachance,willexercisepowerdifferently.”47Thereality,however,isthattheexistinghierarchydisciplinesnewcomers,requiringthemtoexercisepowerinthesameoldwaysandplaybythesameoldrulesinordertosurvive.Thenewcomers,TorresandGuinierexplain,areeasilyco-opted,astheyhavemuchtolosebutlittletogainbychallengingtherulesofthegame.Theirpointisparticularlyrelevanttothepredicamentofminoritypoliceofficerschargedwithwaging

the drugwar. Profound racial injustice occurs whenminority police officers follow the rules. It is ascandalwhenthepubliclearnstheyhavebrokentherules,butnorulesneedbebrokenforthesystematicmass incarceration of people of color to proceed unabated. This uncomfortable fact creates strongincentives for minority officers to deny, to rationalize, or to be willingly blind to the role of lawenforcementincreatingaracialundercaste.Reportsthatminorityofficersmayengageinnearlyasmuchracialprofilingaswhiteofficershavebeenmetwithsomeamazement,buttherealsurpriseisthatsomeminoritypoliceofficershavebeenwillingtospeakoutagainstthepractice,giventheferocityofthedrugwar.Awarhasbeendeclaredagainstpoorcommunitiesofcolor,andthepoliceareexpectedtowageit.Doweexpectminorityofficers,whoselivelihooddependsontheverydepartmentschargedwithwagingthewar, toplay the roleofpeacenik?Thatexpectationseemsunreasonable,yet thedilemmafor racialjusticeadvocatesisarealone.ThequietcomplicityofminorityofficersintheWaronDrugsservestolegitimatethesystemandinsulateitfromcritique.InanationstillstuckinanoldJimCrowmind-set—whichequatesracismwithwhitebigotryandviewsracialdiversityasprooftheproblemhasbeensolved—a racially diverse police department invites questions like: “How can you say the Oakland PoliceDepartment’sdrugraidsareracist?There’sablackpolicechief,andmostoftheofficersinvolvedinthedrug raids are black.” If the caste dimensions of mass incarceration were better understood and thelimitationsofcosmeticdiversitywerebetterappreciated,theexistenceofblackpolicechiefsandblackofficers would be no more encouraging today than the presence of black slave drivers and blackplantationownershundredsofyearsago.Whenmeaningfulchangefailstomaterializefollowingtheachievementofsuperficialdiversity,those

who remain lockedout canbecome extremely discouraged anddemoralized, resulting in cynicismandresignation. Perhaps more concerning, though, is the fact that inclusion of people of color in power

structures, particularly at the top, can paralyze reform efforts. People of color are often reluctant tochallengeinstitutionsledbypeoplewholooklikethem,astheyfeelapersonalstakeintheindividual’ssuccess.Aftercenturiesofbeingdeniedaccesstoleadershippositionsinkeysocialinstitutions,peopleofcolorquiteunderstandablyarehesitanttocreatecircumstancesthatcouldtriggerthedownfallof“oneoftheirown.”Anincidentofpolicebrutalitythatwouldbeunderstoodasundeniablyracistiftheofficersinvolved were white may be given a more charitable spin if the officers are black. Similarly, blackcommunityresidentswhomighthavebeen inspired tochallengeaggressivestop-and-friskpoliciesofalargelywhitepolicedepartmentmayworryabout“hurting”ablackpolicechief.Peopleofcolor,becauseofthehistoryofracialsubjugationandexclusion,oftenexperiencesuccessandfailurevicariouslythroughthefewwhoachievepositionsofpower,fame,andfortune.Asaresult,cosmeticdiversity,whichfocuseson providing opportunities to individual members of under-represented groups, both diminishes thepossibilitythatunfairruleswillbechallengedandlegitimatestheentiresystem.

Obama—thePromiseandthePeril

ThisdynamicposesparticularrisksforracialjusticeadvocacyduringanObamapresidency.Ontheonehand, the election of Barack Obama to the presidency creates an extraordinary opportunity for thoseseekingtoendthesystemofmassincarcerationinAmerica.Obama’sstatedpositionsoncriminaljusticereformsuggestthatheisopposedtotheWaronDrugsandthesystematictargetingofAfricanAmericansformassincarceration.48Shouldn’twetrusthim,nowthatheisholdingthereinsofpower,todotherightthing?Trust is tempting, especially because Obama himself violated our nation’s drug laws and almost

certainlyknowsthathislifewouldnothaveunfoldedasitdidifhehadbeenarrestedondrugchargesandtreatedlikeacommoncriminal.Ashewroteinhismemoirabouthiswaywardyouth,“Pothadhelped,andbooze;maybealittleblowwhenyoucouldaffordit.”UnlikeBillClinton,whofamouslyadmittedheexperimentedwithmarijuana on occasion “but didn’t inhale,”Obama has neverminimized his illegaldruguse.Ashesaidina2006speechtotheAmericanSocietyofMagazineEditors,“Look,youknow,when I was a kid, I inhaled. Frequently. That was the point.”49 Those “bad decisions,” Obama hasacknowledged,couldhaveledhimtoapersonaldeadend.“Junkie.Pothead.That’swhereI’dhavebeenheaded:thefinal,fatalroleoftheyoungwould-beblackman.”NodoubtifObamahadbeenarrestedandtreatedlikeacommoncriminal,hecouldhaveservedyearsinprisonandbeenlabeledadrugfelonforlife.WhatarethechanceshewouldhavegonetoHarvardLawSchool,muchlessbecomepresidentoftheUnited States, if that had happened? It seems reasonable to assume that Obama, who knows a littlesomethingaboutpovertyandthetemptationsofdrugs,wouldhavea“therebutforthegraceofGodgoI”attitudeaboutthemillionsofAfricanandLatinomenimprisonedfordrugoffensescomparabletohisownorsaddledforlifewithfelonyrecords.Butbeforewekickback,relax,andwaitforracialjusticetotrickledown,considerthis:Obamachose

JoeBiden,oneoftheSenate’smoststridentdrugwarriors,ashisvicepresident.ThemanhepickedtoserveashischiefofstaffintheWhiteHouse,RahmEmanuel,wasamajorproponentoftheexpansionofthedrugwarandtheslashingofwelfarerollsduringPresidentClinton’sadministration.Andthemanhetapped to lead theU.S.Department of Justice—the agency that launched and continues to oversee thefederalwar on drugs—is anAfricanAmerican formerU.S. attorney for theDistrict ofColumbiawhosoughttoratchetupthedrugwarinWashington,D.C.,andfoughtthemajorityblackD.C.CityCouncilinan effort to impose harshmandatoryminimums formarijuana possession.Moreover, on the campaigntrail,Obamatookadramaticstepbackfromanearlierpositionopposingthedeathpenalty,announcingthathenowsupportsthedeathpenaltyforchildrapists—evenifthevictimisnotkilled—eventhoughtheU.S. Supreme Court ruled the death penalty for nonhomicides unconstitutional and international lawstrongly disfavors the practice. The only countries that share Obama’s view are countries like SaudiArabia,Egypt,andChina,whichallowthedeathpenaltyforthingslikeadulteryandtaxevasion.SowhydidObama, on the campaign trail, go out of hisway to announce disagreementwith a SupremeCourtdecisionrulingthedeathpenaltyforchildrapistsunconstitutional?Clearlyhewasattemptingtoimmunizehimself from any attempt to portray him as “soft” on crime—a tactic reminiscent of Bill Clinton’sdecision to fly back toArkansas during the 1992 presidential campaign to oversee the execution of amentallyretardedblackman.Seasoned activists may respond that all of this is “just politics,” but, as we have seen in earlier

chapters, they are the samepolitics that gave rise to theNew JimCrow.Now that crime seems to berising again in some ghetto communities,Obama is pledging to revive PresidentClinton’sCommunityOrientedPolicingServices(COPS)programandincreasefundingfortheByrnegrantprogram—twooftheworst federaldrugprogramsof theClintonera.50These programs, despite their benign names, are

responsibleforthemilitarizationofpolicing,SWATteams,Pipelinedrugtaskforces,andthelaundrylistofdrug-warhorrorsdescribedinchapter2.ClintononceboastedthattheCOPSprogram,whichputtensofthousandsofofficersonthestreets,was

responsible for thedramatic fifteen-yeardrop inviolentcrime thatbegan in the1990s.Recent studies,however, have shown that is not the case. A 2005 report by the Government Accountability Officeconcludedtheprogrammayhavecontributedtoa1percentreductionincrime—atacostof$8billion.51Apeer-reviewedstudyinthejournalCriminologyfoundthattheCOPSprogram,despitethehype,“hadlittle or no effect on crime.”52 And while Obama’s drug czar, former Seattle Police Chief GilKerlikowske, has said theWar onDrugs should no longer be called a war, Obama’s budget for lawenforcement isactuallyworse thantheBushadministration’s in termsof theratioofdollarsdevotedtopreventionanddrugtreatmentasopposedtolawenforcement.53Obama,whoiscelebratedasevidenceofAmerica’s triumphover race, isproposingnothing less than revvingup thedrugwar through the samefailedpoliciesandprogramsthathavesystematicallylockedyoungmenofcolorintoapermanentracialundercaste.Theuniqueandconcerningsituationracialjusticeadvocatesnowfaceisthattheverypeoplewhoare

most oppressed by the current caste system—African Americans—may be the least likely to want tochallengeit,nowthatablackfamilyislivingintheWhiteHouse.IfObamawerewhite,therewouldbenohesitation to remindhimofhisyouthfuldrugusewhenarguing thatheshouldend thedrugwarandmakegoodonhispromisestoendunjustmandatoryminimums.ButdoAfricanAmericanswantthemediatotalkaboutObama’sdruguse?DoAfricanAmericanswanttopressureObamaonanyissue,letaloneissuesofrace?Togoonestepfurther,coulditbethatmanyAfricanAmericanswouldactuallyprefertoignore racial issues during Obama’s presidency, to help ensure him smooth sailing and a triumphantpresidency,nomatterhowbadthingsareforAfricanAmericansinthemeantime?Thefact that the lastquestioncouldplausiblybeansweredyes raisesseriousquestions for thecivil

rightscommunity.Haveweunwittinglyexaggeratedtheimportanceofindividualssucceedingwithinpre-existing structures of power, and therebyunderminedKing’s call for a “complete restructuring”of oursociety?Havewecontributedtothedisempowermentandpassivityoftheblackcommunity,notonlybylettingthelawyerstakeover,butalsobycommunicatingthemessagethatthebestpath—perhapstheonlypath—tothepromisedlandisinfiltratingeliteinstitutionsandseizingpoweratthetop,soracialjusticecantrickledown?TorresandGuiniersuggesttheanswertothesequestionsmaybeyes.Theyobservethat,“surprisingly,

strategistsonboth the leftand right,despite theirdifferences,convergeon the individualas theunitofpower.”54Conservativeschallengethelegitimacyofgrouprightsorraceconsciousnessandarguethatthebestempowermentstrategyisentrepreneurshipandindividualinitiative.Civilrightsadvocatesarguethatindividual group members “represent” the race and that hierarchies of power that lack diversity areillegitimate. The theory is, when black individuals achieve power for themselves, black people as agroupbenefit,asdoessocietyasawhole.“Hereweseeboth liberalsandconservativesendorsing thesamemeta-narrativeofAmericanindividualism:Whenindividualsgetahead,thegrouptriumphs.Whenindividualssucceed,Americandemocracyprevails.”55Theabsenceofathoroughgoingstructuralcritiqueoftheprevailingracialorderexplainswhysomany

civilrightsadvocatesrespondedtoBarackObama’selectionwithglee,combinedwithhastyremindersthat“westillhavealongwaytogo.”Thepredictableresponsefromthecasualobserveris:well,howmuchfurther?Ablackmanwasjustelectedpresident.Howmuchfurtherdoblackpeoplewanttogo?Ifablackpersoncanbeelectedpresident,can’tablackpersondojustaboutanythingnow?

AllofUsorNone

At the same time that many civil rights advocates have been pursuing lawyer-driven, trickle-downstrategies for racial justice, a growing number of formerly incarcerated men and women have beenorganizing inmajor cities across theUnitedStates, providing assistance to those newly released fromprisonandengagingingrassrootspoliticalactivisminpursuitofbasiccivilrights.Onesuchorganization,basedinOakland,California,isnamedAllofUsorNone.Thenameexplicitlychallengesapoliticsthataffords inclusion and acceptance for a few but guarantees exclusion for many. In spirit, it assertssolidaritywiththe“leastoftheseamongus.”Diversity-driven affirmative action, as described and implemented today, sends adifferentmessage.

Themessageisthat“someofus”willgaininclusion.Asapolicy,itisblindtothosewhoarebeyonditsreach, the colored faces at the bottomof thewell.One policy alone can’t save theworld, the skepticmightrespond.Trueenough.Butwhatifaffirmativeaction,asithasbeenframedanddebated,doesmoreharmthangood,viewedfromtheperspectiveof“allofus”?Thisbringsustoacriticalquestion:whoistheusthatcivilrightsadvocatesarefightingfor?Judging

fromtheplethoraofgroupsthathaveembarkedontheirowncivilrightscampaignssinceMartinLutherKingJr.’sassassination—women,gays,immigrants,Latinos,AsianAmericans—theanswerseemstobethatusincludeseveryoneexceptwhitemen.Thisresultisnotillogical.WhenMalcolmXcondemned“thewhiteman”anddeclaredhimtheenemy,

hewasnot,ofcourse,speakingaboutanyparticularwhiteman,butratherthewhite,patriarchalorderthatcharacterizedbothslaveryandJimCrow.MalcolmXunderstoodthat theUnitedStateswascreatedbyandforprivilegedwhitemen.Itwaswhitemenwhodominatedpolitics,controlledthenation’swealth,andwrotetherulesbywhicheveryoneelsewasforcedtolive.NogroupintheUnitedStatescanbesaidtohaveexperiencedmoreprivilege,andgonetogreaterlengthstoprotectit,than“thewhiteman.”Yetthewhiteman,itturnsout,hassufferedtoo.Thefactthathissufferinghasbeenfarlessextreme,

andhasnotbeenlinkedtoabeliefinhisinherentinferiority,hasnotmadehissufferinglessreal.Civilrightsadvocates,however,havetreatedthewhiteman’ssufferingaslargelyirrelevanttothepursuitofthepromised land.As civil rights lawyers unveiled plans to desegregate public schools, itwas poor andworking-classwhiteswhowere expected to bear the burden of this profound social adjustment, eventhoughmany of themwere as desperate for upward social mobility and quality education as AfricanAmericans. According to the 1950 census, among Southerners in their late twenties, the state-by-statepercentagesof functional illiterates(peoplewith less thanfiveyearsofschooling)forwhitesonfarmsoverlapped with those for blacks in the cities. The majority of Southern whites were better off thanSouthernblacks,buttheywerenotaffluentorwelleducatedbyanymeans;theyweresemiliterate(withlessthantwelveyearsofschooling).Onlyatinyminorityofwhiteswereaffluentandwelleducated.Theystoodfarapartfromtherestofthewhitesandvirtuallyallblacks.56What lower-class whites did have was what W.E.B. Du Bois described as “the public and

psychologicalwage”paid towhiteworkers,whodependedon their status andprivileges aswhites tocompensateforlowpayandharshworkingconditions.57Asdescribedinchapter1,timeandtimeagain,poorandworking-classwhiteswerepersuadedtochoosetheirracialstatusinterestsovertheircommoneconomic interests with blacks, resulting in the emergence of new caste systems that onlymarginallybenefitedwhitesbutweredevastatingforAfricanAmericans.Inretrospect,itseemsclearthatnothingcouldhavebeenmoreimportantinthe1970sand1980sthan

finding a way to create a durable, interracial, bottom-up coalition for social and economic justice toensurethatanothercastesystemdidnotemergefromtheashesofJimCrow.Priorityshouldhavebeengiven tofiguringoutsomewayforpoorandworking-classwhites tofeelas thoughtheyhadastake—

sometangible interest—in thenascent integratedracialorder.AsLaniGuinierpointsout,however, theracial liberalismexpressed in theBrownv.BoardofEducation decision and endorsedby civil rightslitigators “did not offer poorwhites even an elementary framework for understandingwhat theymightgainasaresultofintegration.”58Nothingintheopinionorinthesubsequentlegalstrategymadeclearthatsegregationhadaffordedelitesacrucialmeansofexercisingsocialcontroloverpoorandworking-classwhitesaswell asblacks.TheSouthernwhiteelite,whetherplantersor industrialists,hadsuccessfullyendeavored to make all whites think in racial rather than class terms, predictably leading whites toexperiencedesegregation,asDerrickBellputit,asanet“loss.”59Giventhatpoorandworking-classwhites(notwhiteelites)weretheoneswhohadtheirworldrocked

by desegregation, it does not take a great leap of empathy to see why affirmative action could beexperiencedassaltinawound.DuBoisonceobservedthatthepsychologicalwageofwhitenessput“anindelibleblackfacetofailure.”60Yetwiththeadventofaffirmativeaction,suddenlyAfricanAmericanswereleapfroggingoverpoorandworking-classwhitesontheirwaytoHarvardandYaleandtakingjobsinpolicedepartmentsandfiredepartmentsthathadoncebeenreservedforwhites.Civilrightsadvocatesofferednobalmforthewound,publiclyresistingcallsforclass-basedaffirmativeactionanddismissingclaims of unfairness on the grounds that whites had been enjoying racial preferences for hundreds ofyears.Resentment,frustration,andangerexpressedbypoorandworking-classwhiteswaschalkeduptoracism,leadingtoasubterraneandiscourseaboutraceandtoimplicitlyracialpoliticalappeals,butlittlehonestdialogue.Perhapsthetimehascometogiveuptheracialbribesandbeginanhonestconversationaboutracein

America.Thetopicoftheconversationshouldbehowuscancometoincludeallofus.Accomplishingthisdegreeofunitymaymeangivingupfiercedefenseofpoliciesandstrategies thatexacerbate racialtensionsandproduceforraciallydefinedgroupsprimarilypsychologicalorcosmeticracialbenefits.Ofcourse, ifmeaningfulprogress is tobemade,whitesmustgiveup their racialbribes too,andbe

willingtosacrificetheirracialprivilege.Somemightarguethat in thisgameofchicken,whitesshouldmakethefirstmove.Whitesshoulddemonstratethattheirsilenceinthedrugwarcannotbeboughtbytacitassurancesthattheirsonsanddaughterswillnotberoundedupenmasseandlockedaway.Whitesshouldprove their commitment to dismantling not onlymass incarceration, but all of the structures of racialinequalitythatguaranteeforwhitestheresilienceofwhiteprivilege.Afterall,whyshould“we”giveupourracialbribesifwhiteshavebeenunwillingtogiveuptheirs?Inlightofournation’sracialhistory,thatseemsprofoundlyunfair.Butifyourstrategyforracialjusticeinvolveswaitingforwhitestobefair,history suggests itwillbea longwait. It’snot thatwhitepeoplearemoreunjust thanothers.Rather itseemsthatanaspectofhumannature is the tendencytoclingtightly toone’sadvantagesandprivilegesandtorationalizethesufferingandexclusionofothers.ThistendencyiswhatledFrederickDouglasstodeclarethat“powerconcedesnothingwithoutademand;itneverhasanditneverwill.”Sowhatistobedemandedinthismomentinournation’sracialhistory?Iftheanswerismorepower,

moretopjobs,moreslotsinfancyschoolsfor“us”—anarrow,raciallydefinedusthatexcludesmany—wewillcontinuethesamepowerstrugglesandcanexpecttoachievemanyofthesameresults.Yes,wemaystillmanagetopersuademainstreamvotersinthemidstofaneconomiccrisisthatwehavereliedtooheavilyonincarceration,thatprisonsaretooexpensive,andthatdruguseisapublichealthproblem,notacrime.But if themovement thatemerges toendmass incarcerationdoesnotmeaningfullyaddress theracialdivisionsandresentmentsthatgaverisetomassincarceration,andifitfailstocultivateanethicofgenuinecare, compassion,andconcern foreveryhumanbeing—ofeveryclass, race, andnationality—withinournation’sborders,includingpoorwhites,whoareoftenpittedagainstpoorpeopleofcolor,thecollapse of mass incarceration will not mean the death of racial caste in America. Inevitably a newsystemofracializedsocialcontrolwillemerge—onethatwecannotforesee,justasthecurrentsystemofmassincarcerationwasnotpredictedbyanyonethirtyyearsago.Notaskismoreurgentforracialjustice

advocatestodaythanensuringthatAmerica’scurrentracialcastesystemisitslast.Givenwhatisatstakeatthismomentinhistory,bolder,moreinspiredactionisrequiredthanwehave

seen to date. Piecemeal, top-down policy reform on criminal justice issues, combined with a racialjustice discourse that revolves largely around the meaning of Barack Obama’s election and “post-racialism,”willnotgetusoutofournation’s racialquagmire.Wemust flip the script.Takingourcuefromthecourageouscivilrightsadvocateswhobrazenlyrefusedtodefendthemselves,marchingunarmedpastwhitemobsthatthreatenedtokillthem,we,too,mustbethechangewehopetocreate.Ifwewanttodomore than just endmass incarceration—if wewant to put an end to the history of racial caste inAmerica—wemustlaydownourracialbribes,joinhandswithpeopleofallcolorswhoarenotcontenttowaitforchangetotrickledown,andsaytothosewhowouldstandinourway:Acceptallofusornone.That is the basic message that Martin Luther King Jr. aimed to deliver through the Poor People’s

Movementbackin1968.Hearguedthenthatthetimehadcomeforracialjusticeadvocatestoshiftfromacivilrightstoahumanrightsparadigm,andthattherealworkofmovementbuildinghadonlyjustbegun.61Ahumanrightsapproach,hebelieved,wouldofferfargreaterhopeforthoseofusdeterminedtocreateathriving,multiracial,multiethnic democracy free from racial hierarchy than the civil rightsmodel hadprovidedtodate.Itwouldofferapositivevisionofwhatwecanstrivefor—asocietyinwhichallhumanbeingsofallracesaretreatedwithdignity,andhavetherighttofood,shelter,healthcare,education,andsecurity.62Thisexpansivevisioncouldopenthedoortomeaningfulalliancesbetweenpoorandworking-classpeopleofallcolors,whocouldbegintoseetheirinterestsasaligned,ratherthaninconflict—nolongerincompetitionforscarceresourcesinazero-sumgame.A human rights movement, King believed, held revolutionary potential. Speaking at a Southern

ChristianLeadershipConferencestaffretreatinMay1967,hetoldSCLCstaff,whowereconcernedthattheCivilRightsMovementhadlostitssteamanditsdirection,“Itisnecessaryforustorealizethatwehavemovedfromtheeraofcivilrightstotheeraofhumanrights.”Politicalreformeffortswerenolongeradequatetothetaskathand,hesaid.“Forthelast12years,wehavebeeninareformmovement....[But]afterSelmaandthevotingrightsbill,wemovedintoanewera,whichmustbeaneraofrevolution.Wemustseethegreatdistinctionbetweenareformmovementandarevolutionarymovement.Wearecalledupontoraisecertainbasicquestionsaboutthewholesociety.”63Morethanfortyyearslater,civilrightsadvocacyisstuckinamodelofadvocacyKingwasdetermined

to leave behind. Rather than challenging the basic structure of society and doing the hard work ofmovementbuilding—thework towhichKingwasstillcommittedat theendofhis life—wehavebeentemptedtoooftenbytheopportunityforpeopleofcolortobeincludedwithinthepoliticalandeconomicstructureas-is,evenifitmeansalienatingthosewhoarenecessaryallies.Wehaveallowedourselvestobewillfullyblindtotheemergenceofanewcastesystem—asystemofsocialexcommunicationthathasdeniedmillionsofAfricanAmericansbasichumandignity.Thesignificanceofthiscannotbeoverstated,forthefailuretoacknowledgethehumanityanddignityofallpersonshaslurkedattherootofeveryracialcaste system.This common thread explainswhy, in the1780s, theBritishSociety for theAbolitionofSlaveryadoptedasitsofficialsealawoodcutofakneelingslaveaboveabannerthatread,“AMINOTAMANANDABROTHER?”ThatsymbolwasfollowedmorethanahundredyearslaterbysignswornaroundthenecksofblacksanitationworkersduringthePoorPeople’sCampaignansweringtheslave’squestionwiththesimplestatement,IAMAMAN.Thefactthatblackmencouldwearthesamesigntodayinprotestofthenewcastesystemsuggeststhat

the model of civil rights advocacy that has been employed for the past several decades is, as Kingpredicted,inadequatetothetaskathand.Ifwecanagreethatwhatisneedednow,atthiscriticaljuncture,is notmore tinkering or tokenism, but asKing insisted forty years ago, a “radical restructuring of oursociety,” then perhapswe can also agree that a radical restructuring of our approach to racial justiceadvocacyisinorderaswell.

All of this is easier said than done, of course. Change in civil rights organizations, like change insociety as a whole, will not come easy. Fully committing to a vision of racial justice that includesgrassroots,bottom-upadvocacyonbehalfof“allofus”willrequireamajorreconsiderationofpriorities,staffing,strategies,andmessages.Egos,competingagendas,careergoals,andinertiamaygetintheway.Itmaybethattraditionalcivilrightsorganizationssimplycannot,orwillnot,change.Tothisitcanonlybesaid,withoutahintofdisrespect:adaptordie.IfMartin LutherKing Jr. is right that the arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice, a new

movementwillarise;andifcivilrightsorganizationsfailtokeepupwiththetimes,theywillpushedtothesideasanothergenerationofadvocatescomestothefore.Hopefullythenewgenerationwillbeledbythosewhoknowbest thebrutalityof thenewcaste system—agroupwithgreater vision, courage, anddeterminationthantheoldguardcanmuster,trappedastheymaybeinanoutdatedparadigm.Thisnewgenerationofactivistsshouldnotdisrespecttheireldersordisparagetheircontributionsorachievements;tothecontrary,theyshouldbowtheirheadsinrespect,fortheirforerunnershaveexpendeduntoldhoursandmadegreatsacrificesinanelusivequestforjustice.Butoncerespectshavebeenpaid,theyshouldmarchrightpastthem,emboldened,asKingoncesaid,bythefierceurgencyofnow.Thoseofuswhohopetobetheiralliesshouldnotbesurprised,ifandwhenthisdaycomes,thatwhen

thosewhohavebeenlockedupandlockedoutfinallyhavethechancetospeakandtrulybeheard,whatwehearisrage.Theragemayfrightenus;itmayremindusofriots,uprisings,andbuildingsaflame.Wemaybetemptedtocontrolit,ordouseitwithbucketsofdoubt,dismay,anddisbelief.Butweshoulddonosuchthing.Instead,whenayoungmanwhowasbornintheghettoandwhoknowslittleoflifebeyondthewallsofhisprisoncellandtheinvisiblecagethathasbecomehislife,turnstousinbewildermentandrage,weshoulddonothingmorethanlookhimintheeyeandtellhimthetruth.Weshouldtellhimthesame truth the greatAfricanAmericanwriter JamesBaldwin told his nephew in a letter published in1962,inoneofthemostextraordinarybookseverwritten,TheFireNextTime.Withgreatpassionandsearingconviction,Baldwinhadthistosaytohisyoungnephew:

ThisisthecrimeofwhichIaccusemycountryandmycountrymen,andforwhichneitherInortimenorhistorywilleverforgivethem,thattheyhavedestroyedandaredestroyinghundredsofthousandsoflivesanddonotknowitanddonotwanttoknowit....Itistheirinnocencewhichconstitutesthecrime....Thisinnocentcountrysetyoudowninaghettoinwhich,infact,itintendedthatyoushouldperish. The limits of your ambitionwere, thus, expected to be set forever.Youwere born into asocietywhich spelled out with brutal clarity, and in asmanyways as possible, that youwere aworthlesshumanbeing.Youwerenotexpectedtoaspiretoexcellence:youwereexpectedtomakepeacewithmediocrity....Youhave,andmanyofushave,defeatedthisintention;and,byaterriblelaw,a terribleparadox, those innocentswhobelieved thatyour imprisonmentmade themsafearelosingtheirgrasponreality.Butthesemenareyourbrothers—yourlost,youngerbrothers.Andifthewordintegrationmeansanything,thisiswhatitmeans:thatwe,withlove,shallforceourbrotherstoseethemselvesastheyare,toceasefleeingfromrealityandbegintochangeit.Forthisisyourhome,myfriend,donotbedrivenfromit;greatmenhavedonegreatthingshere,andwillagain,andwecanmakeAmericawhat itmustbecome.Itwillbehard,butyoucomefromsturdy,peasantstock,menwhopickedcottonanddammedriversandbuiltrailroads,and,intheteethofthemostterrifyingodds,achievedanunassailableandmonumentaldignity.Youcomefroma long lineofgreatpoetssinceHomer.Oneof them said,The very time I thought Iwas lost,My dungeon shook andmychainsfelloff....Wecannotbefreeuntiltheyarefree.Godblessyou,andGodspeed.64

Notes

Introduction

1JarviousCottonwasaplaintiffinCottonv.Fordice,157F.3d388(5thCir.1998),whichheldthatMississippi’sfelondisenfranchisementprovisionhadlostitsraciallydiscriminatorytaint.TheinformationregardingCotton’sfamilytreewasobtainedbyEmilyBoltononMarch29,1999,whensheinterviewedCottonatMississippiStatePrison.JarviousCottonwasreleasedonparoleinMississippi,astatethatdeniesvotingrightstoparolees.2TheNewYorkTimesmadethenationalmedia’sfirstspecificreferencetocrackinastorypublishedinlate1985.CrackbecameknowninafewimpoverishedneighborhoodsinLosAngeles,NewYork,andMiamiinearly1986.SeeCraigReinarmanandHarryLevine,“TheCrackAttack:America’sLatestDrugScare,1986-1992,”inImagesofIssues:TypifyingContemporarySocialProblems(NewYork:AldineDeGruyter,1995),152.3TheReaganadministration’sdecisiontopublicizecrack“horrorstories”isdiscussedinmoredepthinchapter1.4ClarencePage,“‘ThePlan’:AParanoidViewofBlackProblems,”Dover(Delaware)Herald,Feb.23,1990.SeealsoManningMarable,Race,Reform,andRebellion:TheSecondReconstructioninBlackAmerica,1945-1990(Jackson:UniversityPressofMississippi,1991),212-13.5SeeAlexanderCockburnandJeffreySt.Clair,Whiteout:TheCIA,Drugs,andthePress(NewYork:Verso,1999).SeealsoNickShou,“TheTruthin‘DarkAlliance,’”LosAngelesTimes,Aug.18,2006;PeterKornbluh,“CIA’sChallengeinSouthCentral,”LosAngelesTimes(Washingtonedition)Nov.15,1996;andAlexanderCockburn,“WhyTheyHatedGaryWebb,”TheNation,Dec.16,2004.6KatherineBeckettandTheodoreSasson,ThePoliticsofInjustice:CrimeandPunishmentinAmerica,(ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications,2004),163.7MarcMauer,RacetoIncarceraterev.ed.(NewYork:TheNewPress,2006),33.8PEWCenterontheStates,Onein100:BehindBarsinAmerica2008(Washington,DC:PEWCenter,Feb.2008),5.9DonaldBraman,DoingTimeontheOutside:IncarcerationandFamilyLifeinUrbanAmerica(AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress,2004),3,citingD.C.DepartmentofCorrectionsdatafor2000.10See,e.g.,U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,SubstanceAbuseandMentalHealthServicesAdministration,SummaryofFindingsfromthe2000NationalHouseholdSurveyonDrugAbuse,NHSDAseriesH-13,DHHSpub.no.SMA01-3549(Rockville,MD:2001),reportingthat6.4percentofwhites,6.4percentofblacks,and5.3percentofHispanicswerecurrentusersofillegaldrugsin2000;Resultsfromthe2002NationalSurveyonDrugUseandHealth:NationalFindings,NHSDAseriesH-22,DHHSpub.no.SMA03-3836(2003),revealingnearlyidenticalratesofillegaldruguseamongwhitesandblacks,onlyasinglepercentagepointbetweenthem;andResultsfromthe2007NationalSurveyonDrugUseandHealth:NationalFindings,NSDUHseriesH-34,DHHSpub.no.SMA08-4343(2007),showingessentiallythesamefinding.SeealsoMarcMauerandRyanS.King,A25-YearQuagmire:The“WaronDrugs”andItsImpactonAmericanSociety(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,Sept.2007),19,citingastudysuggestingthatAfricanAmericanshaveslightlyhigherratesofillegaldrugusethanwhites.11See,e.g.,HowardN.SnyderandMelissaSickman,JuvenileOffendersandVictims:2006NationalReport,U.S.DepartmentofJustice,OfficeofJusticePrograms,OfficeofJuvenileJusticeandDelinquencyPrevention(Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofJustice,2006),reportingthatwhiteyoutharemorelikelythanblackyouthtoengageinillegaldrugsales.SeealsoLloydD.Johnson,PatrickM.O’Malley,JeraldG.Bachman,andJohnE.Schulenberg,MonitoringtheFuture,NationalSurveyResultsonDrugUse,1975-2006,vol.1,SecondarySchoolStudents,U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHuman

Services,NationalInstituteonDrugAbuse,NIHpub.no.07-6205(Bethesda,MD:2007),32,“AfricanAmerican12thgradershaveconsistentlyshownlowerusageratesthanWhite12thgradersformostdrugs,bothlicitandillicit”;andLloydD.Johnston,PatrickM.O’Malley,andJeraldG.Bachman,MonitoringtheFuture:NationalResultsonAdolescentDrugUse:OverviewofKeyFindings2002,U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,NationalInstituteonDrugAbuse,NIHpub.no.03-5374(Bethesda,MD:2003),presentingdatashowingthatAfricanAmericanadolescentshaveslightlylowerratesofillicitdrugusethantheirwhitecounterparts.12HumanRightsWatch,PunishmentandPrejudice:RacialDisparitiesintheWaronDrugs,HRWReportsvol.12,no.2(NewYork,2000).13See,e.g.,PaulStreet,TheViciousCircle:Race,Prison,Jobs,andCommunityinChicago,Illinois,andtheNation(ChicagoUrbanLeague,DepartmentofResearchandPlanning,2002).14MichaelTonry,ThinkingAboutCrime:SenseandSensibilityinAmericanPenalCulture(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2004),14.15Ibid.16Ibid.,20.17NationalAdvisoryCommissiononCriminalJusticeStandardsandGoals,TaskForceReportonCorrections(Washington,DC:GovernmentPrintingOffice,1973),358.18Ibid.,597.19Mauer,RacetoIncarcerate,17-18.

Chapter1:TheRebirthofCaste

1RevaSiegel,“WhyEqualProtectionNoLongerProtects:TheEvolvingFormsofStatus-EnforcingAction,”StanfordLawReview49(1997):1111;seealsoMichaelOmiandHowardWinant,RacialFormationintheUnitedStates:Fromthe1960stothe1990s(NewYork:Routledge,1996),84-91.2LoïcWacquant,“America’sNew‘PeculiarInstitution’:OnthePrisonasSurrogateGhetto,”TheoreticalCriminology4,no.3(2000):380.3LeroneBennettJr.,TheShapingofBlackAmerica(Chicago:Johnson,1975),62.4ForanexcellentanalysisofthedevelopmentofraceasasocialconstructintheUnitedStatesandaroundtheglobe,seeHowardWinant,TheWorldIsaGhetto:RaceandDemocracySinceWorldWarII(NewYork:BasicBooks,2001).5Bennett,ShapingofBlackAmerica,62.6KeithKiltyandEricSwank,“InstitutionalRacismandMediaRepresentations:DepictionsofViolentCriminalsandWelfareRecipients,”SociologicalImagination34,no.2-3(1997):106.7EdmundMorgan,AmericanSlavery,AmericanFreedom:TheOrdealofColonialVirginia(NewYork:Norton,1975).8Ibid.;seealsoLeslieCarr,ColorblindRacism(ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications,1997),14-16.9GeraldFresia,TowardanAmericanRevolution:ExposingtheConstitutionandOtherIllusions(Boston:SouthEndPress,1998),55.10Wacquant,“America’sNew‘PeculiarInstitution,’”380.11C.VannWoodward,TheStrangeCareerofJimCrow(1955;reprint,NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2001).12WilliamCohen,AtFreedom’sEdge:BlackMobilityandtheSouthernWhiteQuestforRacialControl(BatonRouge:LouisianaStateUniversityPress,1991),28.13Ibid.,33.14W.E.B.DuBois,“ReconstructionandItsBenefits,”AmericanHistoricalReview15,no.4(1910):784.15JamesMcPherson,“ComparingtheTwoReconstructions,”PrincetonAlumniWeekly,Feb.26,1979,17.16SeeMichaelKlarman,FromJimCrowtoCivilRights:TheSupremeCourtandtheStruggleforRacialEquality(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2004),49,52-53.17JohnHopeFranklinandAlfredA.Moss,FromSlaverytoFreedom:AHistoryofAfricanAmericans,8thed.(NewYork:Knopf,2000),82;andEricFoner,Reconstruction:America’sUnfinishedRevolution,1863-1877(NewYork:Harper&Row,1988),425.18DouglasBlackmon,SlaverybyAnotherName:TheRe-enslavementofBlackPeopleinAmericafromtheCivilWartoWorldWarII(NewYork:Doubleday,2008).19Ruffinv.Commonwealth,62Va.790,796(1871).20DavidM.Oshinsky,WorseThanSlavery:ParchmanFarmandtheOrdealofJimCrowJustice(NewYork:FreePressPaperbacks,1996),63.21SeeDouglasBlackmon,“ADifferentKindofSlavery,”WallStreetJournalOnline,Mar.29,2008.22Woodward,StrangeCareerofJimCrow,45-64.23Ibid.,61.24TomWatson,“TheNegroQuestionintheSouth,”citedinStokelyCarmichaelandCharlesV.Hamilton,BlackPower:ThePoliticsofLiberationinAmerica(NewYork:RandomHouse,1967).25Woodward,StrangeCareerofJimCrow,64.26WilliamJuliusWilson,TheDecliningSignificanceofRace:BlacksandChangingAmerican

Institutions(UniversityofChicagoPress,1978),54.27Woodward,StrangeCareerofJimCrow,80.28Ibid.,81.29Ibid.,7.30GunnarMyrdal,AnAmericanDilemma:TheNegroProblemandModernDemocracy(NewYork:Harper&Brothers,1944).31ManningMarable,Race,ReformandRebellion:TheSecondReconstructioninBlackAmerica,1945-1990(Jackson:UniversityPressofMississippi,1991),44;seealsoMichaelKlarman,“Brown,RacialChange,andtheCivilRightsMovement,”VirginiaLawReview80(1994),7,9.32Marable,Race,ReformandRebellion,69.33StephenF.Lawson,BlackBallots:VotingRightsintheSouth,1944-1969(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1976),300,321,329,331.34FrancesFoxPivenandRichardA.Cloward,PoorPeople’sMovements:WhyTheySucceed,HowTheyFail(NewYork:Pantheon,1977),269.35JohnDonovan,ThePoliticsofPoverty(Indianapolis:Pegasus,1973),23.36GeraldMcKnight,TheLastCrusade:MartinLutherKing,Jr.,theFBI,andthePoorPeople’sCampaign(NewYork:WestviewPress,1998),21-22.37RichardNixon,“IfMobRuleTakesHoldinU.S.,”U.S.NewsandWorldReport,Aug.15,1966,64.38U.S.House,“NorthernCongressmenWantCivilRightsbutTheirConstituentsDoNotWantNegroes,”CongressionalRecord,86thCong.,2dsess.(1960)106,pt.4:5062-63.39KatherineBeckett,MakingCrimePay:LawandOrderinContemporaryAmericanPolitics(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1997),32.40VeslaM.Weaver,“Frontlash:RaceandtheDevelopmentofPunitiveCrimePolicy,”StudiesinAmericanPoliticalDevelopment21(Fall2007):242.41BarryGoldwater,“PeaceThroughStrength,”inVitalSpeechesoftheDay,vol.30(NewYork:CityNews,1964),744.42“Poverty:PhonyExcuseforRiots?Yes,SaysaKeySenator,”U.S.NewsandWorldReport,July31,1967,14.43JoelRosch,“CrimeasanIssueinAmericanPolitics,”inThePoliticsofCrimeandCriminalJustice(BeverleyHills:SagePublications,1985).44Beckett,MakingCrimePay,32.45MarcMauer,RacetoIncarcerate(NewYork:TheNewPress,1999),52.46Weaver,“Frontlash,”262.47Ibid.48Klarman,FromJimCrowtoCivilRights,110.49See,e.g.,PatrickBuchanan,TheNewMajority:PresidentNixonatMid-Passage(Philadelphia:GirardBank,1973).50WillardM.Oliver,TheLaw&OrderPresidency(UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:PrenticeHall,2003),127-28,citingDanBaum,SmokeandMirrors:TheWaronDrugsandthePoliticsofFailure(Boston:Little,Brown,1996),13.51JohnEhrlichman,WitnesstoPower:TheNixonYears(NewYork:Simon&Schuster,1970),233.52Ibid.53SeeKevinPhillips,TheEmergingRepublicanMajority(NewRochelle,NY:ArlingtonHouse,1969).54WarrenWeaver,“TheEmergingRepublicanMajority,”NewYorkTimes,Sept.21,1969.55Beckett,MakingCrimePay,34.56LyndonJohnson,“RemarksontheCityHallSteps,Dayton,Ohio,”inPublicPapersofthePresidents1963-64,vol.2(1965),1371.

57ThomasByrneEdsallandMaryD.Edsall,ChainReaction:TheImpactofRace,Rights,andTaxesonAmericanPolitics(NewYork:Norton,1992),12-13.58Ibid.,38.59Ibid.,74.60Weaver,“Frontlash,”259.61SeePhilipA.KlinkerandRogersM.Smith,TheUnsteadyMarch:TheRiseandDeclineofRacialEqualityinAmerica(UniversityofChicagoPress,1999),292.62EdsallandEdsall,ChainReaction,4.63Ibid.,138;seealsoJeremyMayer,RunningonRace(NewYork:RandomHouse,2002),71.64Ibid.65BobHerbert,“RightingReagan’sWrongs?”NewYorkTimes,Nov.13,2007;seealsoPaulKrugman,“RepublicansandRace,”NewYorkTimes,Nov.19,2007.66EdsallandEdsall,ChainReaction,148,quotingNewYorkTimes,Feb.15,1976.67Ibid.,quotingWashingtonPost,Jan.28,1976.68DickKirschten,“JungleWarfare,”NationalJournal,Oct.3,1981.69EdsallandEdsall,ChainReaction,164.70Beckett,MakingCrimePay,47.71Ibid.,56;seealsoJulianRoberts,“PublicOpinion,CrimeandCriminalJustice,”inCrimeandJustice:AReviewofResearch,vol.16,ed.MichaelTonry(UniversityofChicagoPress,1992).72Beckett,MakingCrimePay,53,citingExecutiveOfficeofthePresident,BudgetoftheU.S.Government(1990).73Ibid.,citingU.S.OfficeoftheNationalDrugControlPolicy,NationalDrugControlStrategy(1992).74Ibid.75Ibid.,56.76SeeWilliamJuliusWilson,WhenWorkDisappears:TheWorldoftheNewUrbanPoor(NewYork:Vintage,1997).77Ibid.,31(citingJohnKasarda,“UrbanIndustrialTransitionandtheUnderclass,”AnnalsoftheAmericanAcademyofPoliticalandSocialScience501,no.1(1990):26-47.78Ibid.,30(citingdatafromtheChicagoUrbanPovertyandFamilyLifeSurveyconductedin1987and1988).79Ibid.,39.80Ibid.,27.81RobertStutman,DeadonDelivery:InsidetheDrugWars,StraightfromtheStreet(NewYork:WarnerBooks,1992),142.82SeeCraigReinarmanandHarryLevine,“TheCrackAttack:America’sLatestDrugScare,1986-1992,”inImagesofIssues:TypifyingContemporarySocialProblems(NewYork:AldineDeGruyter,1995).83Ibid.,154.84Ibid.,170-71.85DorisMarieProvine,UnequalUnderLaw:RaceintheWaronDrugs(UniversityofChicagoPress,2007),111,citingCongressionalRecord132(Sept.24,1986):S13741.86Provine,UnequalUnderLaw,117.87MarkPeffley,JonHurwitz,andPaulSniderman,“RacialStereotypesandWhites’PoliticalViewsofBlacksintheContextofWelfareandCrime,”AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience41,no.1(1997):30-60;MartinGilens,“RacialAttitudesandOppositiontoWelfare,”JournalofPolitics57,no.4(1995):994-1014;KathlynTaylorGaubatz,CrimeinthePublicMind(AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress,1995);andJohnHurwitzandMarkPeffley,“PublicPerceptionsofRaceandCrime:The

RoleofRacialStereotypes,”AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience41,no.2(1997):375-401.88SeeFrankFurstenberg,“PublicReactiontoCrimeintheStreets,”AmericanScholar40(1971):601-10;ArthurStinchcombe,etal.,CrimeandPunishmentinAmerica:ChangingAttitudesinAmerica(SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass,1980);MichaelCorbett,“PublicSupportforLawandOrder:InterrelationshipswithSystemAffirmationandAttitudesTowardMinorities,”Criminology19(1981):337.89StephenEarlBennettandAlfredJ.Tuchfarber,“TheSocialStructuralSourcesofCleavageonLawandOrderPolicies,”AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience19(1975):419-38;SandraBrowningandLiqunCao,“TheImpactofRaceonCriminalJusticeIdeology,”JusticeQuarterly9(Dec.1992):685-99;andStevenF.Cohn,StevenE.Barkan,andWilliamA.Halteman,“PunitiveAttitudesTowardCriminals:RacialConsensusorRacialConflict?”SocialProblems38(1991):287-96.90Beckett,MakingCrimePay,44.91Ibid.,citingNewYorkTimes/CBSNewsPoll,Aug.1990,2-4).92SeeBeckett,MakingCrimePay,14-27.93“KuKluxKlanSaysItWillFightDrugs,”ToledoJournal,Jan.3-9,1990.94MichaelKramer,“FryingThemIsn’ttheAnswer,”Time,Mar.14,1994,32.95DavidMasci,“$30BillionAntiCrimeBillHeadstoClinton’sDesk,”CongressionalQuarterly,Aug.27,1994,2488-93;andBeckett,MakingCrimePay,61.96JusticePolicyInstitute,“ClintonCrimeAgendaIgnoresProvenMethodsforReducingCrime,”Apr.14,2008,availableonlineatwww.justicepolicy.org/content-hmID=1817&smID=1571&ssmID=71.htm.97AddressBeforeaJointSessionofCongressontheStateoftheUnion,Jan.23,1996.98U.S.DepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopment,MeetingtheChallenge:PublicHousingAuthoritiesRespondtothe‘OneStrikeandYou’reOut’Initiative,Sept.1997,v.

Chapter2:TheLockdown

1SeeMarcMauer,RacetoIncarcerate,rev.ed.(NewYork:TheNewPress,2006),33.2MarcMauerandRyanKing,A25-YearQuagmire:The“WaronDrugs”andItsImpactonAmericanSociety(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,2007),2.3Ibid.,3.4Ibid.,2-3.5Ibid.;andRyanKingandMarcMauer,TheWaronMarijuana:TheTransformationoftheWaronDrugsinthe1990s(NewYork:SentencingProject,2005),documentingthedramaticincreaseinmarijuanaarrests.Marijuanaisarelativelyharmlessdrug.The1988surgeongeneral’sreportliststobaccoasamoredangerousdrugthanmarijuana,andFrancisYoung,anadministrativelawjudgefortheDrugEnforcementAdministrationfoundtherearenocrediblemedicalreportstosuggestthatconsumingmarijuana,inanydose,hasevercausedasingledeath.U.S.DepartmentofJustice,DrugEnforcementAdministration,OpinionandRecommendedRuling,FindingsofFact,ConclusionsofLawandDecisionofAdministrativeLawJudgeFrancisL.Young,intheMatterofMarijuanaReschedulingPetition,Docketno.86-22,Sept.6,1988,56-57.Bycomparison,tobaccokillsroughly390,000Americnsannually,andalcoholisresponsibleforsome150,000U.S.deathsayear.SeeDougBandow,“WaronDrugsorWaronAmerica?”StanfordLawandPolicyReview3:242,245(1991).6PewCenterontheStates,Onein31:TheLongReachofAmericanCorrections(Washington,DC:PewCharitableTrusts,Mar.2009).7Skinnerv.RailwayLaborExecutiveAssociation,489U.S.602,641(1980),Marshall,J.,dissenting.8Californiav.Acevedo,500U.S.565,600(1991),Stevens.J.,dissenting.9Terryv.Ohio,392U.S.1,30(1968).10Ibid.,DouglasJ.,dissenting.11SeegenerallyUnitedStatesv.Lewis,921F.2d1294,1296(1990);UnitedStatesv.Flowers,912F.2d707,708(4thCir.1990);andFloridav.Bostick,501U.S.429,441(1991).12See,e.g.,Floridav.Kerwick,512So.2d347,349(Fla.App.4Dist.1987).13SeeUnitedStatesv.Flowers,912F.2d707,710(4thCir.1990).14Bostickv.State,554So.2d1153,1158(Fla.1989),quotingStatev.Kerwick,512So.2d347,348-49(Fla.4thDCA1987).15InreJ.M.,619A.2d497,501(D.C.App.1992).16IllinoisMigrantCouncilv.Pilliod,398F.Supp.882,899(N.D.Ill.1975).17TracyMaclin,“BlackandBlueEncounters—SomePreliminaryThoughtsAboutFourthAmendmentSeizures:ShouldRaceMatter?”ValparaisoUniversityLawReview26(1991):249-50.18Floridav.Bostick,501U.S.429,441n.1(1991),Marshall,J.,dissenting.19Maclin,“BlackandBlueEncounters.”20Schnecklothv.Bustamonte,412U.S.218,229(1973).21SeeIllinoisv.Caballes,543U.S.405(2005)andUnitedStatesv.Place,462U.S.696(1983).22SeeU.S.DepartmentofJustice,DrugEnforcementAdministration,OperationsPipelineandConvoy(Washington,DC,n.d.),www.usdoj.gov/dea/programs/pipecon.htm.23RicardoJ.Bascuas,“FourthAmendmentLessonsfromtheHighwayandtheSubway:APrincipledApproachtoSuspicionlessSearches,”RutgersLawJournal38(2007):719,763.24Statev.Rutherford,93OhioApp.3d586,593-95,639N.E.2d498,503-4,n.3(OhioCt.App.1994).25GaryWebb,“DrivingWhileBlack,”Esquire,Apr.1,1999,122.26Ibid.27ScottHenson,FlawedEnforcement:WhyDrugTaskForceHighwayInterdictionViolatesRights,

WastesTaxDollars,andFailstoLimittheAvailabilityofDrugsinTexas(Austin:AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion—TexasChapter,May2004),9,www.aclu.org/racialjustice/racialprofiling/15897pub20040519.html.28DavidCole,NoEqualJustice:RaceandClassintheAmericanCriminalJusticeSystem(NewYork:TheNewPress,1999),47.29FloridaDepartmentofHighwaySafetyandMotorVehicles,OfficeofGeneralCounsel,CommonCharacteristicsofDrugCouriers(1984),sec.I.A.4.30Cole,NoEqualJustice,49.31“FluidDrugCourierProfilesSeeEveryoneAsSuspicious,”CriminalPracticeManual5(BureauofNationalAffairs:July10,1991):334-35.32MauerandKing,25-YearQuagmire,3.33KatherineBeckett,MakingCrimePay:LawandOrderinContemporaryAmericanPolitics(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1997),45;andMauer,RacetoIncarcerate,49.34U.S.DepartmentofJustice,DepartmentofJusticeDrugDemandReductionActivities,ReportNo.3-12(Washington,DC:OfficeoftheInspectorGeneral,Feb.2003),35,www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/plus/a0312.35RadleyBalko,Overkill:TheRiseofParamilitaryPoliceRaidsinAmerica(Washington,DC:CatoInstitute,July17,2006),8.36MeganTwohey,“SWATsUnderFire,”NationalJournal,Jan.1,2000,37;Balko,Overkill,8.37TimothyEgan,“SoldiersoftheDrugWarRemainonDuty,”NewYorkTimes,Mar.1,1999.38Ibid.,8-9.39ScottAndron,“SWAT:ComingtoaTownNearYou?”MiamiHerald,May20,2002.40Balko,Overkill,11,citingPeterKraska,“ResearchingthePolice-MilitaryBlur:LessonsLearned,”PoliceForum14,no.3(2005).41Balko,Overkill,11,citingBrittRobson,“FriendlyFire,”MinneapolisCityPages,Sept.17,1997.42Ibid.,43(citingKraskaresearch).43Ibid.,49(citingVillageVoice).44Ibid.,50;“NotAllMarijuanaLawVictimsAreArrested:PoliceOfficerWhoFatallyShotSuspectedMarijuanaUserClearedofCriminalCharges,”NORMLNews,July13,1995,druglibrary.org/olsen/NORML/WEEKLY/95-07-13.html;TimothyLynch,AfterProhibition(Washington,DC:CatoInstitute,2000),82;andvarioussourcesciting“DodgeCountyDetectiveCan’tRememberFatalShot;UnarmedManKilledinDrugRaidatHisHome,”MilwaukeeJournal-Sentinel,Apr.29,1995,A1,and“TheWeek,”NationalReview,June12,1995,14.45Ibid.,10,citingStevenElbow,“HookedonSWAT:FueledwithDrugEnforcementMoney,Military-StylePoliceTeamsAreExplodingintheBackwoodsofWisconsin,”MadisonCapitolTimes,Aug.18,2001.46EricBlumensonandEvaNilson,“PolicingforProfit:TheDrugWar’sHiddenEconomicAgenda,”UniversityofChicagoLawReview65(1998):35,45.47Ibid.,64.48BlumensonandNilson,“PolicingforProfit,”72.49Ibid.,71.50Ibid.,82.51Ibid.52Ibid.,83.53Ibid.54Ibid.55Ibid.,98.

56MichaelFessierJr.,“Trail’sEndDeepinaWildCanyonWestofMalibu,aControversialLawBroughtTogetheraZealousSheriff’sDeputyandanEccentricRecluse;aFewSecondsLater,DonaldScottWasDead,”LosAngelesTimesMagazine,Aug.1,1993;andOfficeoftheDistrictAttorneyofVentura,California,ReportontheDeathofDonaldScott(Ventura:Mar.30,1993),availableatwww.fear.org/chron/scott.txt.57PeterD.Lepsch,“Wanted:CivilForfeitureReform,”DrugPolicyLetter,Summer1997,12.58JamesMassey,SusanMiller,andAnnaWilhelmi,“CivilForfeitureofProperty:TheVictimizationofWomenasInnocentOwnersandThirdParties,”inCrimeControlandWomen,ed.SusanMiller(ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications,1998),17.59UnitedStatesv.OneParcelofRealEstateLocatedat9818S.W.94Terrace,788F.Supp.561,565(S.D.Fla.1992).60DavidHunt,“ObamaFieldsQuestionsonJacksonvilleCrime,”FloridaTimes-Union,Sept.22,2008.61JohnBalzar,“TheSystem:Deals,Deadlines,FewTrials,”LosAngelesTimes,Sept.4,2006.62MarcMauerandRyanS.King,SchoolsandPrisons:FiftyYearsAfterBrownv.BoardofEducation(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,Apr.2004),4.63LauraParker,“8YearsinaLouisianaJailbutHeNeverWenttoTrial,”USAToday,Aug.29,2005.64MauerandKing,SchoolsandPrisons,4.65AmericanBarAssociation,StandingCommitteeonLegalAidandIndigentDefendants,Gideon’sBrokenPromise:America’sContinuingQuestforEqualJustice(Washington,DC:AmericanBarAssociation,Dec.2004),ExecutiveSummaryIV;adoptedbyAmericanBarAssociationHouseofDelegates,Aug.9,2005,www.abanet.org/leadership/2005/annual/dailyjournal/107.doc.66Parker,“8YearsinaLouisianaJail.”67KimBrooksandDarleneKamine,eds.,JusticeCutShort:AnAssessmentofAccesstoCounselandQualityofRepresentationinDelinquencyProceedingsInOhio(Columbus:OhioStateBarFoundation,Mar.2003),28.68Mauer,RacetoIncarcerate,35-37.69SeeAngelaJ.Davis,ArbitraryJustice:ThePoweroftheAmericanProsecutor(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2007),31-33.70SeeAlexandraNatapoff,“Snitching:TheInstitutionalandCommunalConsequences,”UniversityofCincinnatiLawReview645(2004);andEmilyJaneDodds,“I’llMakeYouaDeal:HowRepeatInformantsAreCorruptingtheCriminalJusticeSystemandWhattoDoAboutIt,”WilliamandMaryLawReview50(2008):1063.71See“RiversideDrugCasesUnderReviewOverUseofSecretInformant,”AssociatedPress,Aug.20,2004;RubenNarvetteJr.,“BlameStretchesFarandWideinDrugScandal,”DallasMorningNews,Nov.14,2003;RobWarden,HowSnitchTestimonySentRandySteidlandOtherInnocentAmericanstoDeathRow(Chicago:NorthwesternUniversitySchoolofLaw,CenterforWrongfulConvictions,2004-5);“TheInformantTrap,”NationalLawJournal,Mar.6,1995;StevenMillsandKenArmstrong,“TheJailhouseInformant,”ChicagoTribune,Nov.16,1999;andTedRohrlichandRobertStewart,“JailhouseSnitches:TradingLiesforFreedom,”LosAngelesTimes,Apr.16,1989.72SeeAdamLiptak,“ConsensusonCountingtheInnocent:WeCan’t,”TheNewYorkTimes,Mar.25,2008;andAdamLiptak,“StudySuspectsThousandsofFalseConfessions,”NewYorkTimes,Apr.19,2004.73ChristopherJ.MumolaandJenniferC.Karberg,DrugUseandDependence,StateandFederalPrisoners,2004(Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofJustice,BureauofJusticeStatistics,Oct.2006);andAshleyNellis,JudyGreene,andMarcMauer,ReducingRacialDisparityintheCriminalJusticeSystem:AManualforPractitionersandPolicymakers,2ded.(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,2008),8.

74Huttov.Davis,454U.S.370(1982).75Harmelinv.Michigan,501U.S.967(1991).76MarcMauer,“TheHiddenProblemofTimeServedinPrison,”SocialResearch74,no.2(Summer2007):701,703.77Lockyerv.Andrade,538U.S.63(2003).78AnneGearam,“SupremeCourtUpholds‘ThreeStrikesLaw,’”AssociatedPress,Mar.5,2003.79SeeFamiliesAgainstMandatoryMinimums,“ProfilesofInjustice,”atwww.famm.org/ProfilesofInjustice/FederalProfiles/MarcusBoyd.aspx.80MarcMauer,“HiddenProblem,”701-2.81“CriticizingSentencingRules,USJudgeResigns,”NewYorkTimes,Sept.30,1990.82JosephTreaster,“TwoFederalJudges,inProtest,RefusetoAcceptDrugCases,”NewYorkTimes,Apr.17,1993.83ChrisCarmody,“RevolttoSentencingisGainingMomentum,”NationalLawJournal,May17,1993,10.84StuartTaylorJr.,“TenYearsforTwoOunces,”AmericanLawyer,Mar.1990,65-66.85MichaelJacobson,DownsizingPrisons:HowtoReduceCrimeandEndMassIncarceration(NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress,2005),215.86SeeMauer,RacetoIncarcerate,33,36-38,citingWarrenYoungandMarkBrown.87PEWCenterfortheStates,Onein31.88JeremyTravis,ButTheyAllComeBack:FacingtheChallengesofPrisonerReentry(Washington,DC:UrbanInstitutePress,2002),32,citingBureauofJusticeStatistics.89Ibid.,94,citingBureauofJusticeStatistics.90Ibid.91Ibid.,32.92Ibid.93Ibid.,49,citingBureauofJusticeStatistics.94LoïcWacquant,“TheNew‘PeculiarInstitution’:OnthePrisonasSurrogateGhetto,”TheoreticalCriminology4,no.3(2000):377-89.

Chapter3:TheColorofJustice

1Frontline,ThePlea,atwww.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/plea/four/stewart.html;andAngelaDavis,ArbitraryJustice:ThePoweroftheAmericanProsecutor(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2007),50-52.2AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion,StoriesofACLUClientsSweptUpintheHearneDrugBustofNovember2000(Washington,DC:AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion,Nov.1,2002),www.aclu.org/DrugPolicy/DrugPolicy.cfm?ID=11160&c=80.3HumanRightsWatch,PunishmentandPrejudice:RacialDisparitiesintheWaronDrugs,HRWReports,vol.12,no.2(May2000).4Ibid.5JeremyTravis,ButTheyAllComeBack:FacingtheChallengesofPrisonerReentry(Washington,DC:UrbanInstitutePress,2002),28.6Ibid.7Ibid.8MarcMauerandRyanS.King,SchoolsandPrisons:FiftyYearsAfterBrownv.BoardofEducation(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,Apr.2004),3.9MarcMauer,TheChangingRacialDynamicsoftheWaronDrugs(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,Apr.2009).10See,e.g.,U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,SubstanceAbuseandMentalHealthServicesAdministration,SummaryofFindingsfromthe2000NationalHouseholdSurveyonDrugAbuse,NHSDAseriesH-13,DHHSpub.no.SMA01-3549(Rockville,MD:2001),reportingthat6.4percentofwhites,6.4percentofblacks,and5.3percentofHispanicswerecurrentillegaldrugusersin2000;Resultsfromthe2002NationalSurveyonDrugUseandHealth:NationalFindings,NSDUHseriesH-22,DHHSpub.no.SMA03-3836(2003),revealingnearlyidenticalratesofillegaldruguseamongwhitesandblacks,onlyasinglepercentagepointbetweenthem;Resultsfromthe2007NationalSurveyonDrugUseandHealth:NationalFindings,NSDUHseriesH-34,DHHSpub.no.SMA08-4343(2007)showingessentiallythesamefindings;andMarcMauerandRyanS.King,A25-YearQuagmire:TheWaronDrugsandItsImpactonAmericanSociety(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,Sept.2007),19,citingastudysuggestingthatAfricanAmericanshaveslightlyhigherratesofillegaldrugusethanwhites.11See,e.g.,HowardN.SnyderandMelissaSickman,JuvenileOffendersandVictims:2006NationalReport,U.S.DepartmentofJustice,OfficeofJusticePrograms,OfficeofJuvenileJusticeandDelinquencyPrevention(Washington,DC:2006),reportingthatwhiteyoutharemorelikelythanblackyouthtoengageinillegaldrugsales;LloydD.Johnson,PatrickM.O’Malley,JeraldG.Bachman,andJohnE.Schulenberg,MonitoringtheFuture,NationalSurveyResultsonDrugUse,1975-2006,vol.1,SecondarySchoolStudents,U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,NationalInstituteonDrugAbuse,NIHpub.no.07-6205(Bethesda,MD:2007),32,stating“AfricanAmerican12thgradershaveconsistentlyshownlowerusageratesthanWhite12thgradersformostdrugs,bothlicitandillicit”;andLloydD.Johnston,PatrickM.O’Malley,andJeraldG.Bachman,MonitoringtheFuture:NationalResultsonAdolescentDrugUse:OverviewofKeyFindings2002,U.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,NationalInstituteonDrugAbuse,NIHpub.no.03-5374(Bethesda,MD:2003),presentingdatashowingthatAfricanAmericanadolescentshaveslightlylowerratesofillicitdrugusethantheirwhitecounterparts.12NationalInstituteonDrugAbuse,MonitoringtheFuture,NationalSurveyResultsonDrugUse,1975-1999,vol.1,SecondarySchoolStudents(Washington,DC:NationalInstituteonDrugAbuse,

2000).13U.S.DepartmentofHealth,NationalHouseholdSurveyonDrugAbuse,1999(Washington,DC:SubstanceAbuseandMentalHealthServicesAdministration,OfficeofAppliedStudies,2000),tableG,p.71,www.samhsa.gov/statistics/statistics.html.14BruceWestern,PunishmentandInequality(NewYork:RussellSageFoundation,2006),47.15Researchershavefoundthatdrugusersaremostlikelytoreportusingasamainsourcefordrugssomeonewhoisoftheirownracialorethnicbackground.See,e.g.,K.JackRiley,Crack,PowderCocaineandHeroin:DrugPurchaseandUsePatternsinSixU.S.Cities(Washington,DC:NationalInstituteofJustice,Dec.1997),1;seealsoGeorgeRengertandJamesLeBeau,“TheImpactofEthnicBoundariesontheSpatialChoiceofIllegalDrugDealers,”paperpresentedattheannualmeetingoftheAmericanSocietyofCriminology,Atlanta,Georgia,Nov.13,2007(unpublishedmanuscript),findingthatmostillegaldrugdealerssellintheirownneighborhoodandthatavarietyoffactorsinfluencewhetherdealersarewillingtotraveloutsidetheirhomecommunity.16SeeRafikMohamedandErikFritsvold,“Damn,ItFeelsGoodtoBeaGangsta:TheSocialOrganizationoftheIllicitDrugTradeServicingaPrivateCollegeCampus,”DeviantBehavior27(2006):97-125.17SeeRalphWeisheit,DomesticMarijuana:ANeglectedIndustry(Westport,CT:Greenwood,1992);andRalphWeisheit,DavidFalcone,andL.EdwardWells,CrimeandPolicinginRuralandSmall-TownAmerica(ProspectHeights,IL:Wave-land,1996).18PatriciaDavisandPierreThomas,“InAffluentSuburbs,YoungUsersandSellersAbound,”WashingtonPost,Dec.14,1997.19HumanRightsWatch,“PunishmentandPrejudice:RacialDisparitiesintheWaronDrugs,”HRW12,no.2(May2000).20PEWCenterontheStates,Onein100:BehindBarsinAmerica2008(Feb.2008)—dataanalysisisbasedonstatisticsformidyear2006publishedbytheU.S.DepartmentofJusticeinJune2007.21Ibid.;PewCenterontheStates,Onein31:TheLongReachofAmericanCorrections(Washington,DC:PewCharitableTrusts,Mar.2009).22HowardSchuman,CharlotteSteeh,LawrenceBobo,andMariaKrysan,RacialAttitudesinAmerica:TrendsandInterpretations(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,1985).23See,e.g.,MarcMauer,RacetoIncarcerate(NewYork:TheNewPress,1999),28-35,92-112.24Ibid.25KatherineBeckettandTheodoreSasson,ThePoliticsofInjustice:CrimeandPunishmentinAmerica(ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications,2004),22.26Citieswithsimilardemographicprofilesoftenhavevastlydifferentdrugarrestandconvictionrates—notbecauseofdisparitiesindrugcrimebutratherbecauseofdifferencesintheamountofresourcesdedicatedtodruglawenforcement.RyanS.King,DisparitybyGeography:TheWaronDrugsinAmerica’sCities(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,Mar.2008).27SubstanceAbuseandMentalHealthServicesAdministration,Resultsfromthe2002NationalSurveyonDrugUseandHealth:DetailedTables,PrevalenceEstimates,StandardErrorsandSampleSizes(Washington,DC:OfficeofNationalDrugControlPolicy,2003),table34.28JimmieReevesandRichardCampbell,CrackedCoverage:TelevisionNews,theAnti-CocaineCrusadeandtheReaganLegacy(Durham,NC:DukeUniversityPress,1994).29DavidJerniganandLoriDorfman,“VisualizingAmerica’sDrugProblems:AnEthnographicContentAnalysisofIllegalDrugStoriesontheNightlyNews,”ContemporaryDrugProblems23(1996):169,188.30RickSzykowny,“NoJustice,NoPeace:AnInterviewwithJeromeMiller,”Humanist,Jan.-Feb.1994,9-19.

31MelissaHickmanBarlow,“RaceandtheProblemofCrimeinTimeandNewsweekCoverStories,1946to1995,”SocialJustice25(1989):149-83.32BettyWatsonBurston,DionneJones,andPatRobertson-Saunders,“DrugUseandAfricanAmericans:MythVersusReality,”JournalofAlcoholandDrugAbuse40(Winter1995):19.33FranklinD.GilliamandShantoIyengar,“PrimeSuspects:TheInfluenceofLocalTelevisionNewsontheViewingPublic,”AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience44(2000):560-73.34See,e.g.,NilanjanaDasgupta,“ImplicitIngroupFavoritism,OutgroupFavoritism,andTheirBehavioralManifestations,”SocialJusticeResearch17(2004):143.Forareviewofthesocialscienceliteratureonthispointanditsrelevancetocriticalracetheoryandantidiscriminationlaw,seeJerryKang,“TrojanHorsesofRace,”HarvardLawReview118(2005):1489.35ThereissomedisputewhetherNietzscheactuallysaidthis.Hedidusetheterm“immaculateperception”inThusSpokeZarathustratodisparagetraditionalviewsofknowledge,butapparentlydidnotsaytheprecisequoteattributedtohim.SeeFriedrichNietzsche,ThusSpokeZarathustra,reprintedinThePortableNietzsche,ed.&trans.WalterKaufmann(NewYork:VikingPenguin,1954),100,233-36.36See,e.g.,JohnF.Dovidio,etal.,“OntheNatureofPrejudice:AutomaticandControlledProcesses,”JournalofExperimentalSocialPsychology33(1997):510,516-17,534.37JoshuaCorrell,etal.,“ThePoliceOfficer’sDilemma:UsingEthnicitytoDisambiguatePotentiallyThreateningIndividuals,JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology83(2001):1314;seealsoKeithPayne,“PrejudiceandPerception:TheRoleofAutomaticandControlledProcessesinMisperceivingaWeapon,”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology81(2001):181.38See,e.g.,Dovidio,etal.,“OntheNatureofPrejudice”;andDasgupta,“ImplicitIngroupFavoritism.”39Ibid.;seealsoBrianNosek,MahzarinBanaji,andAnthonyGreenwald,“HarvestingImplicitGroupAttitudesandBeliefsfromaDemonstrationWebSite,”GroupDynamics6(2002):101.40Correll,“PoliceOfficer’sDilemma.”41Nosek,etal.,“HarvestingImplicitGroupAttitudes.”42Ibid.43JohnA.Bargh,etal.,“AutomaticityofSocialBehavior:DirectEffectsofTraitConstructandStereotypeActivationonAction,”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology71(1996):230;GilliamandIyengar,“PrimeSuspects”;JenniferL.Eberhardtetal.,“LookingDeathworthy,”PsychologicalScience17,no.5(2006):383-86(“[J]urorsareinfluencednotsimplybytheknowledgethatthedefendantisBlack,butalsobytheextenttowhichthedefendantappearstobestereotypicallyBlack.InfactfortheBlackswith[themoststereotypicalfaces],thechanceofreceivingadeathsentencemorethandoubled”);JenniferL.Eberhardtetal.,“SeeingBlack:Race,Crime,andVisualProcessing,”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPscychology87,no.6(2004):876-93(notonlywereblackfacesconsideredmorecriminalbylawenforcement,butthemorestereotypicalblackfaceswereconsideredtobethemostcriminalofall);andIreneV.Blair,“TheInfluenceofAfrocentricFacialFeaturesinCriminalSentencing,”PsychologicalScience15,no.10(2004):674-79(findingthatinmateswithmoreAfrocentricfeaturesreceivedharshersentencesthanindividualswithlessAfrocentricfeatures).44SeeKathrynRussell,TheColorofCrime(NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress,1988),coiningthetermcriminalblackman.45ThenotionthattheSupremeCourtmustapplyahigherstandardofreviewandshowspecialconcernforthetreatmentof“discreteandinsularminorities”—whomaynotfarewellthroughthemajoritarianpoliticalprocess—wasfirstrecognizedbytheCourtinthefamousfootnote4ofUnitedStatesv.CarolineProductsCo.,301U.S.144,n.4(1938).46Whrenv.UnitedStates,517U.S.806(1996).47McCleskeyv.Kemp,481U.S.279,327(1989),Brennan,J.,dissenting.48Ibid.,321.

49Ibid.,296.Ironically,theCourtexpressedconcernthattheseruleswouldmakeitdifficultforprosecutorstodisproveracialbias.Apparently,theCourtwasunconcernedthatdefendants,duetoitsrulinginthecase,wouldnotbeabletoproveracialbiasbecauseofthesamerules.50Ibid.,314-16.51Ibid.,339.52UnitedStatesv.Clary,846F.Supp.768,796-97(E.D.Mo.1994).53DorisMarieProvine,UnequalUnderLaw:RaceintheWaronDrugs(UniversityofChicagoPress,2007),26.54Davis,ArbitraryJustice,5.55YickWov.Hopkins,118U.S.356,373-74(1886).56See,e.g.,SandraGrahamandBrianLowery,“PrimingUnconsciousRacialStereotypesAboutAdolescentOffenders,”LawandHumanBehavior28,no.5(2004):483-504.57ChristopherSchmitt,“PleaBargainingFavorsWhites,asBlacks,HispanicsPayPrice,”SanJoseMercuryNews,Dec.8,1991.58See,e.g.,CarlE.PopeandWilliamFeyerherm,“MinorityStatusandJuvenileJusticeProcessing:AnAssessmentoftheResearchLiterature,”CriminalJusticeAbstracts22(1990):527-42;CarlE.Pope,RickLovell,andHeidiM.Hsia,U.S.DepartmentofJustice,DisproportionateMinorityConfinement:AReviewoftheResearchLiteraturefrom1989Through2001(WashingtonDC:U.S.DepartmentofJustice,2002);EleanorHintonHoytt,VincentSchiraldi,BrendaV.Smith,andJasonZiedenberg,ReducingRacialDisparitiesinJuvenileDetention(Baltimore:AnnieE.CaseyFoundation,2002),20-21.59EileenPoe-YamagataandMichaelA.Jones,AndJusticeforSome:DifferentialTreatmentofMinorityYouthintheJusticeSystem(Washington,DC:BuildingBlocksforYouth,2000).60NationalCouncilonCrimeandDelinquency,AndJusticeforSome:DifferentialTreatmentofMinorityYouthintheJusticeSystem(Washington,DC:BuildingBlocksforYouth,2007).61SeeGeorgeBridgesandSaraSteen,“RacialDisparitiesinOfficialAssessmentsofJuvenileOffenders:AttributionalStereotypesasMediatingMechanisms,”AmericanSociologicalReview63,no.4(1998):554-70.62Swainv.Alabama,380U.S.202(1965),overruledbyBatsonv.Kentucky,476U.S.79(1986).63Strauderv.WestVirginia,100U.S.303,308(1880).64Ibid.,309.65BennoC.SchmidtJr.,“Juries,Jurisdiction,andRaceDiscrimination:TheLostPromiseofStrauderv.WestVirginia,”TexasLawReview61(1983):1401.66See,e.g.,Smithv.Mississippi,162U.S.592(1896);Gibsonv.Mississippi,162U.S.565(1896);andBrownfieldv.SouthCarolina,189U.S.426(1903).67Nealv.Delaware,103U.S.370,397(1880).68Ibid.,402-3(quotingDelawareSupremeCourt).69Miller-Elv.Cockrell,537U.S.322,333-34(2003).70Ibid.,334-35.71BrianKalt,“TheExclusionofFelonsfromJuryService,”AmericanUniversityLawReview53(2003):65,67.72MichaelJ.RaphaelandEdwardJ.Ungvarsky,“Excuses,Excuses:NeutralExplanationsUnderBatsonv.Kentucky,”UniversityofMichiganJournalofLawReform27(1993):229,236.73SheriLynnJohnson,“TheLanguageandCulture(NottoSayRace)ofPeremptoryChallenges,”WilliamandMaryLawReview35(1993):21,59.74Purkettv.Elm,514U.S.765,771n.4(1995),Stevens,J.,dissentingandquotingprosecutor.75Ibid.,767.

76Ibid.,768.77Ibid.78SeeLynnLu,“ProsecutorialDiscretionandRacialDisparitiesinSentencing:SomeViewsofFormerU.S.Attorneys,”FederalSentencingReporter19(Feb.2007),192.79DouglasS.MasseyandNancyA.Denton,AmericanApartheid:SegregationandtheMakingoftheUnderclass(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,1993),2.80Foradiscussionofpossiblereplacementeffects,seeRobertMacCounandPeterReuter,DrugWarHeresies:LearningfromOtherVices,Times,andPlaces(NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,2001).81SeeKatherineBeckett,KrisNyrop,LoriPfingst,andMelissaBowen,“DrugUse,DrugPossessionArrests,andtheQuestionofRace:LessonsfromSeattle,”SocialProblems52,no.3(2005):419-41;andKatherineBeckett,KrisNyrop,andLoriPfingst,“Race,DrugsandPolicing:UnderstandingDisparitiesinDrugDeliveryArrests,”Criminology44,no.1(2006):105.82Beckett,“DrugUse,”436.83Ibid.84Ibid.85DavidCole,NoEqualJustice:RaceandClassintheAmericanCriminalJusticeSystem(NewYork:TheNewPress,1999),161.86Ibid.,162.87CityofLosAngelesv.Lyons,461U.S.95,105(1983).88Quernv.Jordan,440U.S.332(1979);andWillv.Mich.Dept.ofStatePolice,491U.S.58(1989).89Monellv.Dept.ofSocialServices,436U.S.658(1978).90SeeUnitedStatesv.Brignoni-Ponce,422U.S.873(1975);andUnitedStatesv.Martinez-Fuerte,428U.S.543(1976).91SeeMassey,AmericanApartheid.92Forathoughtfuloverviewofthesestudies,seeDavidHarris,ProfilesinInjustice:WhyRacialProfilingCannotWork(NewYork:TheNewPress,2002).93Statev.Soto,324N.J.Super.66,69-77,83-85,734A.2d350,352-56,360(N.J.Super.Ct.LawDiv.1996).94Harris,ProfilesinInjustice,80.95Ibid.96JeffBrazilandSteveBerry,“ColorofDriversIsKeytoStopsonI-95Videos,”OrlandoSentinel,Aug.23,1992;andDavidHarris,“DrivingWhileBlackandAllOtherTrafficOffenses:TheSupremeCourtandPretextualTrafficStops,”JournalofCriminalLawandCriminology87(1997):544,561-62.97ACLU,DrivingWhileBlack:RacialProfilingonourNation’sHighways(NewYork:AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion,1999)3,27-28.98Seewww.aclunc.org,pressrelease,“OaklandPoliceDepartmentAnnouncesResultsofRacialProfilingDataCollection,”May11,2001.99AlBakerandEmilyVasquez,“NumberofPeopleStoppedbyPoliceSoarsinNewYork,”NewYorkTimes,Feb.3,2007.100OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneralofNewYorkState,ReportontheNewYorkCityPoliceDepartment’s“Stop&Frisk”Practices(NewYork:OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneralofNewYorkState,1999),95,111,121,126.101Ibid.,117n.23102BakerandVasquez,“NumberofPeopleStoppedbyPoliceSoars.”103RyanPintado-VertnerandJeffChang.“TheWaronYouth,”Colorlines2,no.4(Winter1999-2000),36.

104Alexanderv.Sandoval,532U.S.275(2001).

Chapter4:TheCruelHand

1ProceedingsoftheColoredNationalConvention,heldinRochester,July6-8,1853(Rochester:PrintedattheofficeofFrederickDouglass’sPapers,1853),16.2Approximately30percentofAfricanAmericanmenarebannedforlifefromjuryservicebecausetheyarefelons.SeeBrianKalt,“TheExclusionofFelonsfromJuryService,”AmericanUniversityLawReview53(2003):65.3JeremyTravis,ButTheyAllComeBack:FacingtheChallengesofPrisonerReentry(Washington,DC:UrbanInstitutePress,2002),73.4WebbHubbell,“TheMarkofCain,”SanFranciscoChronicle,June10,2001;NoraDemleitner,“PreventingInternalExile:TheNeedforRestrictionsonCollateralSentencingandConsequences,”StanfordLawandPolicyReview11,no.1(1999):153-63.5MarcMauerandMedaChesney-Lind,eds.,InvisiblePunishment:TheCollateralConsequencesofMassImprisonment(NewYork:TheNewPress,2002),5,citingAmericanBarAssociation,TaskForceonCollateralSanctions,Introduction,ProposedStandardsonCollateralSanctionsandAdministrativeDisqualificationofConvictedPersons,draft,Jan.18,2002.6FrederickDouglass,“WhatNegroesWant,”inTheLifeandWritingsofFrederickDouglass,vol.4,ed.PhilipS.Foner(NewYork:International,1955),159-60.7JeffManzaandChristopherUggen,LockedOut:FelonDisenfranchisementandAmericanDemocracy(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2006),152.8HumanRightsWatch,NoSecondChance:PeoplewithCriminalRecordsDeniedAccesstoHousing(NewYork:HumanRightsWatch,2006),ix.9PresidentBillClinton,“RemarksbythePresidentatOneStrikeSymposium,”WhiteHouse,OfficeofthePressSecretary,Mar.28,1996,http://clinton6.nara.gov/1996/03/1996-03-28-president-remarks-at-one-strike-symposium.html.10MemorandumfromPresidentClintontoHUDSecretaryon“OneStrikeandYou’reOut”Guidelines,Mar.28,1996,http://clinton6.nara.gov/1996/03/1996-03-28-memo-on-one-strike-and-you’re-out-guidelines.html;andPresidentBillClinton,“RemarksbythePresidentatOneStrikeSymposium.”11U.S.DepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopment,noticePIH96-16(HA),Apr.29,1996,andattached“onestrike”guidelines,HUD,“‘OneStrikeandYou’reOut’ScreeningandEvictionGuidelinesforPublicHousingAuthorities,”Apr.12,1996.12HumanRightsWatch,NoSecondChance.13Ibid.,vi.14Ruckerv.Davis,237F.3d1113(9thCir.2001).15DepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentv.Rucker,535U.S.125(2002).16HumanRightsWatch,NoSecondChance,i.17MarthaNelson,PerryDees,andCharlotteAllen,TheFirstMonthOut:Post-IncarcerationExperiencesinNewYorkCity(NewYork:VeraInstituteofJustice,1999).18EdwardRhine,WilliamSmith,andRonaldJackson,ParolingAuthorities:RecentHistoryandCurrentPractice(Laurel,MD:AmericanCorrectionalAssociation,1991).19GeneJohnson,“‘BantheBox’MovementGainsSteam,”WaveNewspapers,NewAmericaMedia,Aug.15,2006.20LegalActionCenter,AfterPrison:RoadblockstoReentry,aReportonStateLegalBarriersFacingPeoplewithCriminalRecords(NewYork:LegalActionCenter,2004),10.21Ibid.22HarryHolzer,StevenRaphael,andMichaelStoll,“WillEmployersHireEx-Offenders?Employer

Preferences,BackgroundChecksandTheirDeterminants,”inTheImpactofIncarcerationonFamiliesandCommunities,ed.MaryPattillo,DavidWeiman,andBruceWestern(NewYork:RussellSageFoundation,2002).23EmployersGroupResearchServices,“EmploymentofEx-Offenders:ASurveyofEmployers’PoliciesandPractices,”SanFrancisco:SFWorks,Apr.12,2002.24JeremyTravis,AmySolomon,andMichelleWaul,FromPrisontoHome:TheDimensionsandConsequencesofPrisonerReentry(Washington,DC:UrbanInstitute,2001);andAmyHirschetal.,EveryDoorClosed:BarriersFacingParentswithCriminalRecords(Washington,DC:CenterforLawandSocialPolicyandCommunityLegalServices,2002).25KeithIhlanfeldtandDavidSjoquist,“TheSpatialMismatchHypothesis:AReviewofRecentStudiesandTheirImplicationsforWelfareReform,”HousingPolicyDebate9,no.4(1998):849;andMichaelStoll,HarryHolzer,andKeithIhlanfeldt,“WithinCitiesandSuburbs:EmploymentDecentralization,NeighborhoodComposition,andEmploymentOpportunitiesforWhiteandMinorityWorkers,”JournalofPolicyAnalysisandManagement,Spring2000.26HarryHolzeretal.,“EmployerDemandforEx-Offenders:RecentEvidencefromLosAngeles,”March2003,unpublishedmanuscript.27Wilson,WhenWorkDisappears,40.28AndrewJacobs,“Crime-RiddenNewarkTriesGettingJobsforEx-Convicts,butfindsSuccessElusive,”NewYorkTimes,Apr.27,2008.29Wilson,WhenWorkDisappears,41.30HarryHolzerandRobertLaLonde,“JobStabilityandJobChangeAmongYoungUnskilledWorkers,”inFindingJobs:WorkandWelfareReform,ed.DavidCardandRebeccaBlank(NewYork:RussellSageFoundation,2000);seealsoJoleenKirshenmanandKathrynNeckerman,“We’dLovetoHireThemBut...”inTheUrbanUnderclass,ed.ChristopherJencksandPaulPeterson(Washington,DC:BrookingsInstitutionPress,1991).31Ibid.,942.32Ibid.,962.33BruceWestern,PunishmentandInequalityinAmerica(NewYork:RussellSageFoundation,2006),90.34Ibid.,91.35SeeDevahPager,Marked:Race,CrimeandFindingWorkinanEraofMassIncarceration(UniversityofChicagoPress,2007),157;StevenRaphael,“ShouldCriminalHistoryRecordsBeUniversallyAvailable?”(reactionessay)inGregPogarsky,“CriminalRecords,EmploymentandRecidivism,”Criminology&PublicPolicy5,no.3(Aug.2006):479-521;andShawnBushway,“LaborMarketEffectsofPermittingEmployerAccesstoCriminalHistoryRecords,”JournalofContemporaryCriminalJustice20(2004):276-91.36KirstenLivingston,“MakingtheBadGuyPay:GrowingUseofCostShiftingasEconomicSanction,”inPrisonProfiteers:WhoMakesMoneyfromMassIncarceration,ed.TaraHerivelandPaulWright(NewYork:TheNewPress,2007),61.37Ibid.,69,citingOhioRev.CodeAnn.Sec.2951.021andOhioRev.CodeSec.2951.021.38BureauofJusticeAssistance,RepayingDebts(CouncilofStateGovernmentsJusticeCenter,2007).39“OutofPrisonandDeepinDebt,”NewYorkTimeseditorial,Oct.6,2007.40Livingston,“MakingtheBadGuyPay,”55.41Ibid.42RyanS.King,FelonyDisenfranchisementLawsintheUnitedStates(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,Sept.2008).43AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion,OutofStepwiththeWorld:AnAnalysisofFelony

DisenfranchisementintheU.S.andOtherDemocracies(NewYork,May2006),4.44Ibid.45Ibid.,6.46SeeLalehIspahaniandNickWilliams,Purged!(NewYork:AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion,Oct.2004);andAlecEwald,ACrazyQuiltofTinyPieces:StateandLocalAdministrationofAmericanCriminalDisenfranchisementLaw(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,Nov.2005).47SashaAbramsky,Conned:HowMillionsWenttoPrison,LosttheVote,andHelpedSendGeorgeW.BushtotheWhiteHouse(NewYork:TheNewPress,2006),224.48Ibid.49GailRussellChaddock,“U.S.NotchesWorld’sHighestIncarcerationRate,”ChristianScienceMonitor,Aug.18,2003.50Abramsky,Conned,207.51Ibid.,207-8.52Ibid.53ChristopherUggenandJeffManza,“DemocraticContraction?PoliticalConsequencesofFelonDisenfranchisementintheUnitedStates,”AmericanSociologicalReview67(2002):777.54ManzaandUggen,LockedOut,137.55Abramsky,Conned,206-7.56SeeKathrynRussell-Brown,TheColorofCrime:RacialHoaxes,WhiteFear,BlackProtectionism,PoliceHarassment,andOtherMacroaggressions(NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress,1998),coiningthetermcriminalblackman.57ManzaandUggen,LockedOut,154.58Ibid.,152.59HumanRightsWatch,NoSecondChance,79.60WillieThompson,interviewedbyGuylandoA.M.Moreno,Mar.2008,Cincinnati,OH.61Abramsky,Conned,140.62DonaldBraman,DoingTimeontheOutside:IncarcerationandFamilyLifeinUrbanAmerica(AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress,2004),219.63Ibid.,3,citingdatafromD.C.DepartmentofCorrections(2000).64SeeToddClear,ImprisoningCommunities:HowMassIncarcerationMakesDisadvantagedNeighborhoodsWorse(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2007),121-48.65See,e.g.,SteveLiss,NoPlaceforChildren:VoicesfromJuvenileDetention(Austin:UniversityofTexasPress,2005).Storiesincludeyouthdescribingtheverbalabusetheyreceivefromtheirparents.66Braman,DoingTimeontheOutside,171.67Ibid.,219,fn.2.68SeeDeborahA.PrenticeandDaleT.Miller,“PluralisticIgnoranceandAlcoholUseonCampus:SomeConsequencesofMisperceivingtheSocialNorm,”JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology64,no.2(1993):243-56.69Braman,DoingTimeontheOutside,216.70CathyCohen,TheBoundariesofBlackness:AIDSandtheBreakdownofBlackPolitics(UniversityofChicagoPress,1999),287.71Braman,DoingTimeontheOutside,174.72Ibid.,184.73Ibid.,185.74Ibid.,186.75Ibid.76GeraldSider,“AgainstExperience:TheStrugglesforHistory,Tradition,andHopeAmongaNative

AmericanPeople,”inBetweenHistoryandHistories,ed.GeraldSiderandGavinSmith(Toronto:UniversityofTorontoPress,1997),74-75.77Braman,DoingTimeontheOutside,220.78Ibid.79JamesThomasSears,GrowingUpGayintheSouth:Race,Gender,andJourneysoftheSpirit(NewYork:Routledge,1991),257.80VictorM.Rios,“TheHyper-CriminalizationofBlackandLatinoMaleYouthintheEraofMassIncarceration,”unpublishedmanuscriptonfilewithauthor.81RobertToll,BlackingUp:TheMinstrelShowinNineteenth-CenturyAmerica(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1974),227.82Ibid.,258.83MelWatkins,OntheRealSide:Laughing,LyingandSignifying:TheUndergroundTraditionofAfrican-AmericanHumorThatTransformedAmericanCulture,fromSlaverytoRichardPryor(NewYork:Simon&Schuster,1994),124-29.84Ibid.;seealsoToll,BlackingUp,226.

Chapter5:TheNewJimCrow

1MichaelEricDyson,“Obama’sRebukeofAbsenteeBlackFathers,”Time,June19,2008.2SamRoberts,“51%ofWomenNowLivingwithaSpouse,NewYorkTimes,Jan.16,2007.3SeeJonathanTilove,“WhereHaveAlltheMenGone?BlackGenderGapIsWidening,”SeattleTimes,May5,2005;andJonathanTilove,“WhereHaveAlltheBlackMenGone?”Star-Ledger(Newark),May8,2005.4Ibid.5Cf.,SalimMuwakkil,“BlackMen:Missing,”InTheseTimes,June16,2005.6G.Garvin,“WhereHavetheBlackMenGone?,”Ebony,Dec.2006.7Oneinelevenblackadultswasundercorrectionalsupervisionatyearend2007,orapproximately3.5millionpeople.SeePewCenterontheStates,Onein31:TheLongReachofAmericanCorrections(Washington,DC:PewCharitableTrusts,Mar.2009).Accordingtothe1850Census,approximately3.2millionblackpeoplewereslaves.8SeeAndrewJ.Cherlin,Marriage,Divorce,Remarriage,rev.ed.,(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,1992),110.9SeeGlennC.Loury,Race,Incarceration,andAmericanValues(Cambridge,MA:MITPress,2008),commentarybyPamKarlan.10StanleyCohen,StatesofDenial:KnowingAboutAtrocitiesandSuffering(Cambridge,UK:Polity,2001),4-5.11IrisMarilynYoung,InclusionandDemocracy(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2000),92-99.12MarilynFrye,“Oppression,”inThePoliticsofReality(Trumansburg,NY:CrossingPress,1983).13SeeMarcMauerandMedaChesney-Lind,eds.,InvisiblePunishment:TheCollateralConsequencesofMassImprisonment(NewYork:TheNewPress,2002);andJeremyTravis,ButTheyAllComeBack:FacingtheChallengesofPrisonerReentry(Washington,DC:UrbanInstitutePress,2005).14NegleyK.TeetersandJohnD.Shearer,ThePrisonatPhiladelphia,CherryHill:TheSeparateSystemofPrisonDiscipline,1829-1913(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,1957),84.15SeeDavidMusto,TheAmericanDisease:OriginsofNarcoticsControl(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,3rded.,1999),4,7,43-44,219-20,describingtheroleofracialbiasinearlierdrugwars;andDorisMarieProvine,UnequalUnderLaw:RaceintheWaronDrugs(UniversityofChicagoPress,2007),37-90,describingracialbiasinalcoholprohibition,aswellasotherdrugwars.16MaryPattillo,DavidF.Weiman,andBruceWestern,ImprisoningAmerica:TheSocialEffectofMassIncarceration(NewYork:RussellSageFoundation,2004),2.17PaulStreet,TheViciousCircle:Race,Prison,Jobs,andCommunityinChicago,Illinois,andtheNation(ChicagoUrbanLeague,DepartmentofResearchandPlanning,2002).18Street,ViciousCircle,3.19AldenLoury,“BlackOffendersFaceStiffestDrugSentences,”ChicagoReporter,Sept.12,2007.20Ibid.21Street,ViciousCircle,15.22DonaldG.Lubinetal.,ChicagoMetropolis2020:2006CrimeandJusticeIndex,(Washington,DC:PewCenterontheStates,2006),5,www.pewcenteronthestates.org/report_detail.aspx?id=33022.23Ibid.,37.24Ibid.,35.25Ibid.,3;seealsoBruceWestern,PunishmentandInequalityinAmerica(NewYork:RussellSageFoundation,2006),12.26Street,ViciousCircle,3.

27Ibid.28Ibid.29Seechapter1,page61,whichdescribestheviewthatPresidentRonaldReagan’sappealderivedprimarilyfromthe“emotionaldistressofthosewhofearorresenttheNegro,andwhoexpectReagansomehowtokeephim‘inhisplace’oratleastechotheirownangerandfrustration.”30Foranexcellentdiscussionofthehistoryoffelondisenfranchisementlaws,aswellastheirmoderndayimpact,seeJeffManzaandChristopherUggen,LockedOut:FelonDisenfranchisementandAmericanDemocracy(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2006).31Cottonv.Fordice,157F.3d388,391(5thCir.1998);seealsoMartineJ.Price,NoteandComment:AddressingEx-FelonDisenfranchisement:Legislationv.Litigation,BrooklynJournalofLawandPolicy11(2002):369,382-83.32SeeJamieFellnerandMarcMauer,LosingtheVote:TheImpactofFelonyDisenfranchisementLawsintheUnitedStates(Washington,DC:SentencingProject,1998).33Loury,Race,Incarceration,andAmericanValues,4834SeeEricLotkeandPeterWagner,“PrisonersoftheCensus:ElectoralandFinancialConsequencesofCountingPrisonersWhereTheyGo,NotWhereTheyComeFrom,”PaceLawReview24(2004):587,availableatwww.prisonpolicy.org/pace.pdf.35SeeBatsonv.Kentucky476U.S.79(1986),discussedinchapter3,page146.36SeePurkettv.Elm,514U.S.765discussedinchapter3,page150.37BrianKalt,“TheExclusionofFelonsfromJuryService,”AmericanUniversityLawReview53(2003):65.38SeeDredScottv.Sandford,60U.S.(How.19)393(1857).39Travis,ButTheyAllComeBack,132.40PeterWagner,“PrisonersoftheCensus”;formoreinformation,seewww.prisonersofthecensus.org.41Travis,ButTheyAllComeBack,281,citingJamesLynchandWilliamSabol,PrisonerReentryinPerspective,CrimePolicyReport,vol.3(Washington,DC:UrbanInstitute,2001).42DinaRose,ToddClear,andJudithRyder,Drugs,Incarcerations,andNeighborhoodLife:TheImpactofReintegratingOffendersintotheCommunity(Washington,DC:U.S.DepartmentofJustice,NationalInstituteofJustice,2002).43SudhirAlladiVenkatesh,TheRobertTaylorHomesRelocationStudy(NewYork:CenterforUrbanResearchandPolicy,ColumbiaUniversity,2002).44Street,ViciousCircle,16.45Ibid.,17.46KeynoteaddressbyPaulaWolffatAnnualLuncheonforAppleseedFundforJusticeandChicagoCouncilofLawyers,Oct.7,2008,www.chicagometropolis2020.org/10_25.htm.47KatherineBeckettandTheodoreSasson,ThePoliticsofInjustice:CrimeandPunishmentinAmerica(ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications,2004),36,citingMercerSullivan,GettingPaid:YouthCrimeandWorkintheInnerCity(NewYork:CornellUniversityPress,1989).48Ibid.49LoïcWacquant,“TheNew‘PeculiarInstitution’:OnthePrisonasSurrogateGhetto,”TheoreticalCriminology4,no.3(2000):377-89.50See,e.g.,DouglasMasseyandNancyDenton,AmericanApartheid:SegregationandtheMakingoftheUnderclass(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,1993).51WhitesarefarmorelikelythanAfricanAmericanstocompletecollege,andcollegegraduatesaremorelikelytohavetriedillicitdrugsintheirlifetimewhencomparedtoadultswhohavenotcompletedhighschool.SeeU.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,SubstanceAbuseandMentalHealthServicesAdministration,Findingsfromthe2000NationalHouseholdSurveyonDrugAbuse

(Rockville,MD:2001).AdultswhohavenotcompletedhighschoolaredisproportionatelyAfricanAmerican.52DevahPager,Marked:Race,Crime,andFindingWorkinanEraofMassIncarceration(UniversityofChicagoPress,2007),90-91,146-47.53JohnEdgarWideman,“DoingTime,MarkingRace,”TheNation,Oct.30,1995.54SeeJuliaCassandConnieCurry,America’sCradletoPrisonPipeline(NewYork:Children’sDefenseFund,2007).55JamesFormanJr.,“Children,CopsandCitizenship:WhyConservativesShouldOpposeRacialProfiling,”inInvisiblePunishment,ed.MauerandLind,159.56Wideman,“DoingTime,MarkingRace.”57Seediscussionofstigmainchapter4.58See,e.g.,CharlesOgletreeandAustinSarat,eds.,FromLynchMobstotheKillingState:RaceandtheDeathPenaltyinAmerica(NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress,2006);andJoyJames,TheNewAbolitionists:(Neo)SlaveNarrativesandContemporaryPrisonWritings(NewYork:StateUniversityofNewYorkPress,2005).59Seediscussionofpollingdatainchapter3.60GlennC.Loury,TheAnatomyofRacialInequality(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2003),82.61Ibid.,82-83.62CraigReinarman,“TheCrackAttack:America’sLatestDrugScare,1986-1992”inImagesofIssues:TypifyingContemporarySocialProblems(NewYork:AldineDeGruyter,1995),162.63MarcMauer,RacetoIncarcerate,rev.ed.(NewYork:TheNewPress,2006),150.64Ibid.,15165Ibid.66SeeMusto,AmericanDisease,4,7,43-44,219-20;andDorisMarieProvine,UnequalUnderLaw,37-9067EricSchlosser,“ReeferMadness,”AtlanticMonthly,Aug.1994,49.68Mauer,RacetoIncarcerate,149.69ThemostcompellingversionofthisargumenthasbeenmadebyRandallKennedyinRace,CrimeandtheLaw(NewYork:VintageBooks,1997).70TracyMeares,“ChartingRaceandClassDifferencesinAttitudesTowardDrugLegalizationandLawEnforcement:LessonsforFederalCriminalLaw,”1BuffaloCriminalLawReview1(1997):137;StephenBennettandAlfredTuchfarber,“TheSocialStructuralSourcesofCleavageonLawandOrderPolicies,”AmericanJournalofPoliticalScience19(1975):419-38;andSandraBrowningandLigunCao,“TheImpactofRaceonCriminalJusticeIdeology,”JusticeQuarterly9(Dec.1992):685-99.71Meares,“ChartingRaceandClassDifferences,”157.72GlennLoury,“ListentotheBlackCommunity,”PublicInterest,Sept.22,1994,35.73Meares,“ChartingRaceandClassDifferences,”160-61.74SeeWilliamJuliusWilson,WhenWorkDisappears:TheWorldoftheNewUrbanPoor(NewYork:VintageBooks,1997),22,citingDelbertElliottstudy.75GlennC.Loury,Race,IncarcerationandAmericanValues(Cambridge,MA:MITPress,2008),81,commentarybyTommieShelby.76SeeTroyDuster,“Pattern,Purpose,andRaceintheDrugWar:TheCrisisofCredibilityinCriminalJustice,”inCrackinAmerica:DemonDrugsandSocialJustice,ed.CraigReinarmanandHarryG.Levine(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1997).77LoïcWacquant,“FromSlaverytoMassIncarceration,”53.78johna.powell,ExecutiveDirectoroftheKirwanInstitutefortheStudyofRaceandEthnicity,personal

communication,Jan.2007.

Chapter6:TheFireThisTime

1SalimMuwakkil,“JenaandthePost-CivilRightsFallacy,”InTheseTimes,Oct.16,2007.2DemocracyNow,“Rev.AlSharpton:JenaMarks‘Beginningofa21stCenturyRightsMovement,’”Sept.21,2007,www.democracynow.org/shows/2007/9/21.3SeeDerrickBell,“ServingTwoMasters:IntegrationIdealsandClientInterestsinSchoolDesegregationLitigation,”YaleLawJournal85(1976):470.4LaniGuinier,LiftEveryVoice(NewYork:Simon&Shuster,1998),220-21.5Ibid.,222.6SeeMichaelKlarman,“TheRacialOriginsofModernCriminalProcedure,”MichiganLawReview99(2000):48,86;DanCarter,Scottsboro:ATragedyoftheAmericanSouth,2ded.(BatonRouge:LouisianaStateUniversityPress,1979),52-53;andMarkTushnet,MakingCivilRightsLaw:ThurgoodMarshallandtheSupremeCourt,1936-1969(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1994),28-29.7JoAnnGibsonRobinson,TheMontgomeryBusBoycottandtheWomenWhoStartedIt(Knoxville:UniversityofTennesseePress,1987),43.8MartinLutherKingJr.andClaybourneCarson,TheAutobiographyofMartinLutherKing,Jr.(NewYork:GrandCentral,2001),44.9SeeAbbyRapoport,“TheWorkThatRemains:AForty-YearUpdateoftheKernerCommissionReport,”EconomicPolicyInstitute,Nov.19,2008.10BruceWestern,PunishmentandInequalityinAmerica(NewYork:RussellSageFoundation,2006),97.11Ibid.,90.12Ibid.,91.13In1972,thetotalrateofincarceration(prisonandjail)wasapproximately160per100,000.Today,itisabout760per100,000.Areductionof79percentwouldbeneededtogetbacktothe160figure—itselfafairlyhighnumberwhenjudgedbyinternationalstandards.14MarcMauer,RacetoIncarcerate(NewYork:TheNewPress,1999),11.15ChristopherSherman,“Cheney,Gonzales,IndictedOverPrisons,”WashingtonTimes,Nov.19,2008.16U.S.SecuritiesandExchangeCommission,CorrectionsCorporationofAmerica,Form10KforthefiscalyearendedDec.31,2005.17SiljaJ.A.Talvi,“OntheInsidewiththeAmericanCorrectionalAssociation,”inPrisonProfiteers:WhoMakesMoneyfromMassIncarceration,ed.TaraHerivelandPaulWright(NewYork:TheNewPress,2007).18StephanieChen,“LargerInmatePopulationIsBoontoPrivatePrisons,”WallStreetJournal,Nov.28,2008.19SeegenerallyHerivelandWright,PrisonProfiteers.Foranexcellentdiscussionofhowsurpluscapital,labor,andlandhelpedtobirththeprisonindustryinruralAmerica,seeRuthWilsonGilmore,GoldenGulag(Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,2007).20Formoreinformationonracialimpactstatements,seeMarcMauer,“RacialImpactStatementsasaMeansofReducingUnwarrantedSentencingDisparities,”OhioStateJournalofCriminalLaw5(2007):19.21Guinier,LiftEveryVoice,223.22MichaelOmiandHowardWinant,RacialFormationintheUnitedStatesfromthe1960stothe1990s(NewYork:Routledge,1994),84-88.23GeraldRosenberg,TheHollowHope:CanCourtsBringAboutSocialChange?(UniversityofChicagoPress,1991),52.

24MichaelKlarman,“Brown,RacialChange,andtheCivilRightsMovement,”VirginiaLawReview80(1994):7,9.25Seeibid.,arguingthatBrownwas“merelyaripple”withonlya“negligibleeffect”ontheSouthandcivilrightsadvocacy.26SeeDavidGarrow,“HopelesslyHollowHistory:RevisionistDevaluingofBrownv.BoardofEducation,”VirginiaLawReview80(1994):151,persuasivelymakingthecasethatBrownwasamajorinspirationtocivilrightsactivistsandprovokedafiercewhitebacklash.27BruceWestern,PunishmentandInequalityinAmerica(NewYork:RussellSageFoundation,2006),5,187;WilliamSpelman,“TheLimitedImportanceofPrisonExpansion,”inTheCrimeDropinAmerica,ed.AlfredBlumsteinandJoelWallman(NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,2000),97-129;andToddR.Clear,ImprisoningCommunities:HowMassIncarcerationMakesDisadvantagedNeighborhoodsWorse(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2007),41-48.28See,e.g.,ToddClear,ImprisoningCommunities,3.29JeffreyReimanmakesasimilarargumentinTheRichGetRicherandthePoorGetPrison,8thed.(NewYork:Allyn&Bacon,2006),althoughhemostlyignoresthedistinctiveroleofraceinstructuringthecriminaljusticesystem.30See“StudyFindsWhitesAnxiousAboutRace,”BryantParkProject,NationalPublicRadio,Dec.3,2007.31FoxButterfield,“WithCashTight,StatesReassessLongJailTerms,”NewYorkTimes,Nov.10,2003.32MarcMauer,“StateSentencingReforms:Isthe‘GetTough’EraComingtoaClose?”FederalSentencingReporter15,no.1(Oct.2002).33AbbyGoodnough,“RelaxingMarijuanaLawHasSomeNervous,”NewYorkTimes,Dec.18,2008,notingthatelevenstateshavedecriminalizedfirst-timepossessionofmarijuana.34Forexample,theballotargumentdraftedbycivilrightsgroupsopposedtoProposition54,a2003Californiaballotinitiativethatwouldhavebannedthecollectionofracialdatabythestategovernment,read:“Weallwantacolorblindsociety.Butwewon’tgettherebybanninginformation.”35MartinLutherKingJr.,StrengthtoLove(Philadelphia:FortressPress,1963),45-48.36Ibid.,31-32.37SeeMaryFrancesBerry,“VindicatingMartinLutherKing,Jr.:TheRoadtoaColorBlindSociety,”JournalofNegroHistory81,no.1-4(Winter-Autumn1996):137,140.38StephenSteinberg,TurningBack:TheRetreatfromRacialJusticeinAmericanThoughtandPolicy(Boston:BeaconPress,1995),167.39FredL.Pincus,ReverseDiscrimination:DismantlingtheMyth(Boulder,CO:LynneRienner,2003).40Rapoport,“TheWorkThatRemains.”41Forananalysisoftheimpactofincarcerationonunemployment,poverty,andeducation,seeWestern,PunishmentandInequalityinAmerica,83-131.42JesseRothsteinandAlbertYoon,“AffirmativeActioninLawSchoolAdmissions:WhatDoRacialPreferencesDo?”NationalBureauofEconomicResearch,Cambridge,MA,Aug.2008,www.nber.org/papers/w14276.43Steinberg,TurningBack,195-96.44MartinLutherKingJr.,“ATestamentofHope,”inATestamentofHope:TheEssentialWritingsandSpeechesofMartinLutherKing,Jr.(NewYork:HarperCollins,1986),321.45Ibid.,315.46LaniGuinierandGeraldTorres,TheMiner’sCanary:EnlistingRace,ResistingPower,TransformingDemocracy(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2002),114.47Ibid.48SeeSentencingProject,2008PresidentialPlatformsonCriminalJustice(Washington,DC,Mar.

2008),www.sentencingproject.org/tmp/File/PresidentialCandidatesPlatforms.pdf.49DrewHarwell,“Obama’sDrugUseDebated,”CBSNews,UWIRE.com,Feb.12,2008.50DavidHunt,“ObamaFieldsQuestionsonJacksonvilleCrime,”FloridaTimes-Union,Sept.22,2008.51UnitedStatesGovernmentAccountabilityOffice,ReporttotheChairman,CommitteeontheJudiciary,HouseofRepresentatives,CommunityPolicingGrants:COPSGrantsWereaModestContributiontoDeclineinCrimein1990s,GAO-06-104,Oct.2005,www.gao.gov/new/items/d06104.pdf.52JohnL.WorrallandTomislavV.Kovandzic,“COPSGrantsandCrimeRevisited,”Criminology45,no.1(Feb.2007):159-90.53GaryFields,“WhiteHouseCzarCallsforEndof‘WaronDrugs,’”WallStreetJournal,May24,2009;seealsoOfficeofNationalDrugControlPolicy,WhiteHouseDrugControlBudget,FY2010FundingHighlights(May2009).54GuinierandTorres,Miner’sCanary,118.55Ibid.56SeeLaniGuinier,“FromRacialLiberalismtoRacialLiteracy:Brownv.BoardofEducationandtheInterest-DivergenceDilemma,”JournalofAmericanHistory92(June2004):103,citingC.ArnoldAnderson,“SocialClassDifferentialsintheSchoolingofYouthWithintheRegionsandCommunity-SizeGroupsoftheUnitedStates,”SocialForces25(May1947):440,436;andC.ArnoldAnderson,“InequalitiesinSchoolingintheSouth,”AmericanJournalofSociology60(May1955):549,553,557.57W.E.B.DuBois,BlackReconstructioninAmerica,1860-1880(NewYork:FreePress,1935),700.58Guinier,“RacialLiberalism,”102.SeealsoBethRoy,BittersintheHoney:TalesofHopeandDisappointmentAcrossDividesofRaceandTime(Fayetteville:UniversityofArkansasPress,1999),318;andPeteDaniel,LostRevolutions:TheSouthinthe1950s(ChapelHill:UniversityofNorthCarolinaPress,2000),270.59SeeDerrickBell,“Brownv.BoardofEducationandtheInterest-ConvergenceDilemma,”HarvardLawReview93(1980):518,525;DavidJ.Armor,ForcedJustice:SchoolDesegregationandtheLaw(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1996),174-93,206-7;andRobertJ.Norrell,“LaborattheBallotBox:AlabamaPoliticsfromtheNewDealtotheDixiecratMovement,”JournalofSouthernHistory57(May1991):201,227,233,234.60W.E.B.DuBois,TheSoulsofBlackFolk(1903;NewYork:Bantam,1989).61ForamoredetailedexplorationofMartinLutherKingJr.’sjourneyfromcivilrightstohumanrights,seeThomasF.Jackson,FromCivilRightstoHumanRights:MartinLutherKing,Jr.andtheStruggleforEconomicJustice(Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress,2006);andStewartBurns,TotheMountaintop:MartinLutherKingJr.’sSacredMissiontoSaveAmerica(NewYork:HarperOne,2005).62Forbackgroundonthenature,structure,andhistoryofhumanrights,seeCynthiaSoohooetal.,eds.,BringingHumanRightsHome,vol.1(NewYork:Praeger,2007).63StewartBurns,“America,YouMustBeBornAgain,”Sojourners33,no.1,(Jan.2004):14.64JamesBaldwin,TheFireNextTime(NewYork:Vintage,1962,1993),5-10.

Index

affirmative action; and black exceptionalism; and colorblindness; and minority police officers/policechiefs;andpoorandworking-classwhitesAlexanderv.SandovalAllofUsorNoneAmericanApartheid(MasseyandDenton)AmericanBarAssociation(ABA)AmericanCivilLibertiesUnion(ACLU):classaction lawsuitagainstCaliforniaHighwayPatrol;DrugLawReformProject;RacialJusticeProjectAmericanCorrectionalAssociationTheAmericanDilemma(Myrdal)TheAnatomyofRacialInequality(Loury)Angelos,WeldonAntiDrugAbuseAct(1986/1988)ArbitraryJustice:ThePoweroftheAmericanProsecutor(Davis)Armstrong,ChristopherLeeArmstrongv.UnitedStatesAtwaterv.CityofLagoVistaTheAudacityofHope(Obama)

Bacon’sRebellionBaldus,David,andBaldusstudyBaldwin,JamesBall,JohnnyLeeBantheBoxcampaignsBanks,TyraBascuas,RicardoBatsonv.KentuckyBeckett,KatherineBell,DerrickBennett,Lerone,Jr.bias,racial:implicit/explicit(conscious/unconscious);andpleabargaining;andprosecutorsBiden,Joe“birdcage”metaphorandstructuralracismblackchurchesblackcodesandvagrancylawsblackexceptionalismBlackmon,DouglasblaxploitationBlumenson,EricBoggsAct(1951)Bostick,TerranceBoyd,MarcusBraman,DonaldBrennan,JusticeWilliamBritishSocietyfortheAbolitionofSlaveryBrown,JamesBrownv.BoardofEducationBryant,ScottBurton,SusanBush,GeorgeH.W.

Bush,GeorgeW.Byrd,RobertByrnegrantprogram

Cahill,ClydeCaliforniaHighwayPatrol(CHP)Californiav.AcevedoCalifornia’sPropositionCalifornia’sPropositionCampbell,RichardCapitalTimes(Madison,Wisconsin)Carroll,DavidCarrolltonbusdisaster(1988)CatoInstituteCentralIntelligenceAgency(CIA)ChainReaction(EdsallandEdsall)Chemerinsky,ErwinCheney,DickChicago,Illinois:ex-offenders;policepresenceinghettocommunities;reentryprogramschild-supportdebtschokeholds,lethalChunn,GwendolynCivilAssetForfeitureReformAct(2000)CivilRightsAct(1866)CivilRightsAct(1964);TitleVIcivilrightsadvocacy,futureof;changingthecultureoflawenforcement;collectivedenialbycivilrightsadvocates;dismantlingthemassincarcerationsystem;andflawedpublicconsensus;grassrootsactivismbyformerlyincarceratedmenandwomen;humanrightsparadigm/approach;Obamapresidency;poorandworking-class whites; and problem of colorblind advocacy; reconsidering affirmative action; reformworkandmovementbuilding;reluctancetoadvocateonbehalfofcriminals;andsentencing;andtrickle-downtheoriesofracialjusticeCivilRightsMovement;backlashagainst;andblackpeoplewhodefiedracialstereotypes;desegregationprotests; and economic justice; and endof JimCrowsystem; and federal legislation; andhuman rightsapproach;initialresistancefromsomeAfricanAmericans;andKing’scallforcompleterestructuringofsociety;PoorPeople’sMovementcivil rights organizations/community; collective denial by; professionalization and conversion ofgrassrootsmovement into legal crusade; reluctance to advocate on behalf of criminals.See also civilrightsadvocacy,futureofClary,EdwardClinton, Bill/Clinton administration; federal drug programs; marijuana use; militarization of War onDrugs; public housing and eviction rules; “tough on crime” policies/legislation; and War on Drugs;welfarereformlegislationCloward,RichardcognitivebiasresearchCohen,CathyCohen,StanleyCohen,WilliamCole,David

Coley,RebekahLevinecolorblindness;andaffirmativeaction;andblackexceptionalism;and“interracialracialcastesystem,”;andmass incarceration;problemof flawedpursuitof;Reagan’s racializedcampaign rhetoric; resistingtemptationtoignoreraceinadvocacy;andU.S.Constitution;andwhites’reluctancetoacknowledgeraceColvin,ClaudetteCommon(rapartist)CommunityOrientedPolicingServices(COPS)programComprehensiveDrugAbusePreventandControlAct(1970)CongressionalBlackCaucus(CBC)consentsearchesandtrafficstopsconservativephilosophyofracerelations(Reconstructionera)conspiracytheoriesandWaronDrugsConstitution,U.S..SeealsoindividualamendmentsCorrectionsCorporationofAmericaCosby,BillCotton,Jarviouscrackcocaine;conspiracytheories;anddrunkdrivingcampaigns;hundred-to-oneratio;mediacampaign;andoutdoordrugactivity/open-airdrugmarkets;andprosecutors’extraordinarydiscretion;andraciallydiscriminatorysentencing;andReagan’sdrugwarcrime and “get tough” policies; black support for; and Clinton administration; andmass incarcerationsystem;andwhitevoterscrimerates;crimereductionandincarcerationrates;drugcrime;andjoblessness;violentcrime“criminalblackman,”Criminology(journal)

Davis,AngelaJ.deathpenalty:Baldusstudyfindings;anddrug-relatedoffenses;and legaladvocacy;andObama;racialbiasinsentencingDeclarationofIndependencedeindustrializationDemocraticPartydenial, collective; “birdcage” metaphor and structural racism; by civil rights advocates; and massincarcerationofblackmenDenton,NancyDiallo,Amadoudisenfranchisement.Seevotingrightsdogs,drug-sniffingDoingTimeontheOutside(Braman)Douglas,JusticeWilliamO.Douglass,FrederickDrake,ClintonDredScottv.Sanforddriver’slicensesDrugEnforcementAgency(DEA);antidrugspending;cashgrants/federalaidtolawenforcement;“drug-courierprofiles,”;OperationPipelinedrugforfeiturelaws;creationofan“innocentowner,”;andpoliceshakedownsandseizures;andReformAct(2000)DrugReformAct(1986)drugtreatment,mandateddruguse, arrests, andconviction rates: cities anddemographicdifferences;prisonadmissions fordrugoffenses;andratesofillegaldruguse;andwhites;andyouths“drug-courierprofiles,”drug-law enforcement and racial discrimination; cognitive bias research; consent searches and trafficstops; crack cases; and drug forfeiture laws; “drug-courier profiles,”; financial incentives to lawenforcement;andFourthAmendment;andghettos;andjuryselection;outdoordrugactivity/open-airdrugmarkets; paramilitary drug raids and police SWAT teams; police training programs; and police/policedepartments;pretexttrafficstops;andprosecutorialdiscretion;raceasfactorinpolicedecisionmaking;racial profiling by police; racially discriminatory sentencing; searches and seizureswith unreasonablesuspicion;sociologicalresearchon;SupremeCourtandclaimsofracialbias;trafficstops;andtheWaronDrugsdrunkdriving,campaignsaddressingDuBois,W.E.B.Dukakis,MichaelDyson,MichaelEric

EbonymagazineEconomicOpportunitiesBill(1964)Edsall,MaryEdsall,ThomaseducationandracialcastesystemEighteenthAmendmentEighthAmendmentEighthCircuitCourtofAppealsEleventhAmendmentEmancipationProclamationEmanuel,RahmTheEmergingRepublicanMajority(Phillips)employment: and ex-criminal offenders; joblessness and violent crime rates; manufacturing jobs anddeindustrialization;the“negativecredential”andsystemofstate-sponsoredstratification;service-sectorjobs;unemployment/joblessnessErlichman,JohnErwin,Sam,Jr.

Farrakhan,Louisfathers,blackFederalBureauofInvestigation(FBI),antidrugfundingFederalismFields,C.VirginiaFifteenthAmendmentTheFireNextTime(Baldwin)FlavorofLove(VH1)Floridav.BostickForman,James,Jr.FourteenthAmendment;andcracksentencing;anddeathpenaltysentencing;andjuryexclusion;andpolicetrafficstops;andraciallydiscriminatorylawenforcementFourthAmendmentFreedmen’sBureauFrye,MarilynFutterman,Craig

gangdatabases“gangstaculture,”gendergap(blackmenandwomen)genocideandWaronDrugsGideonv.WainwrightglobalizationGoldwater,BarryGoodwillIndustriesGreatDepressionGuinier,Lani

Haldeman,H.R.Harlemriots(1964)Harmelinv.MichiganHarwood,RichardHill,BarbaraHininger,DamonHispanics/Latinos:prisonadmissionsfordrugoffenses;ratesofillegaldrugusehomelessnessHousingandUrbanDevelopment(HUD)housingdiscriminationhumanrightsapproachHumanRightsWatchHurley,OraLee

InreGault(1967)incarceration.Seemassincarcerationsystemindenturedservitudeindifference,racialinner-cityeconomiccollapseIrving,Lawrence

Jackson,JesseJefferson,Thomas“Jena6,”JimCrowsystem:birthof;blackcooperationwith;andCivilRightsMovement;deathof;andSupremeCourt;votingrightsanddisenfranchisement;andWorldWarII,36.SeealsomassincarcerationandJimCrow(parallels/differences)Johnson,LyndonB.Johnson,SheriLynnJohnson,WillieJournalofAlcoholandDrugEducationjuries: and felon exclusion; and peremptory strikes; and prosecutors’ discretion; and “stereotypicallyblack”defendants;SupremeCourtrulingsgoverningjuryselectionJusticeDepartment,U.S.;Bureau ofStatistics; report in impact of bias in criminal justice system; andstreetcrimeJusticePolicyInstitute

Karlan,PamelaKennedy,JusticeAnthonyKennedy,JohnF.Kerlikowske,GilKilty,KeithKing,MartinLutherKing,MartinLuther,Jr.;andaffirmativeaction;callforcompleterestructuringofsociety;andcivilrightslawyers/legalcases;oncolorblindnessandindifference;andhumanrightsapproach;andPoorPeople’sMovement;andRosaParksKlarman,MichaelKraska,PeterKuKluxKlanKuKluxKlanActs

Lambright,NshombiLaw&Order(television)law enforcement. See drug-law enforcement and racial discrimination; police/police departments anddrug-lawenforcementLawrence,CharlesLawyers’CommitteeforCivilRightsoftheSanFranciscoBayAreaLeadershipConferenceonCivilRightsLee,WilliamLevine,Harryliberalphilosophyofracerelations(Reconstructionera)Lincoln,AbrahamLockyerv.AndradeLosAngelesPoliceDepartment(LAPD):databasesfor“gang-related”activity;andlethalchokeholdsLosAngelesTimesLoury,GlennLyons,Adolph

Maclin,TraceyMadison,JamesMalcolmXmandatory minimum sentencing; and AntiDrug Abuse Act; and plea bargaining; reform efforts; andSupremeCourtMarchonWashingtonforJobsandEconomicFreedom(1963)marijuana: and deaths; decriminalization of; felony possession and arrests; and mandatory sentencingguidelines;usebyClinton/Obama;andvotingrights;whitemiddleclassusers;white/blackstudentusersMarshall,PrentissMarshall,StanleyMarshall,JusticeThurgoodmassincarcerationandJimCrow(parallels/differences);andargumentthatracehasalwaysinfluencedthecriminaljusticesystem;blacksupportfor“gettough”policiesoncrime;collectivedenial;differenceslimits of the analogy; exclusion from juries; historical parallels; legalized discrimination; andmarginalization; and overt racial hostility; parallels; political disenfranchisement; racialsegregation; stereotypes about black men fathers; Supreme Court’s pattern of responding to racialcaste/claimsofracialbias;thesymbolicproductionofrace;whitevictimsmass incarceration system; and absence of black men/black fathers; arguments that race has alwaysinfluenced the criminal justice system; collective denial of; and colorblindness; and crime reductionstatistics; finalstage(periodof invisiblepunishment); firststage; incarcerationrates;originsof;prisonprofiteers;privateprisons; reformanddismantlingof; secondphase; sizeof;andstigmaofcriminality.Seealsopostprisonrelease(ex-offenders);prisons;WaronDrugsandthecriminaljusticesystemMassey,DouglasMatsuda,MariMauer,MarcMcCaffrey,BarryMcClesky,WarrenMcCleskyv.KempMcCormickInstituteofPublicAffairsMcKnight,GeraldMcLaurinv.Oklahoma(1950)McNair,Murraymediacoverage:crackcocaine stories; imageryofblackdrugusers/drugcriminals; and“Jena6,”; andObama’scampaignspeechonfatherhoodandpersonalresponsibility;ReaganadministrationandWaronDrugsMiamiHeraldMilitaryCooperationwithLawEnforcementAct(1981)militarypolicingandWaronDrugsMiller,JeromeMillerElv.CockrellTheMiner’sCanary(TorresandGuinier)minstrelshowsMontgomeryBusBoycottmoratoriumcampaign(closingprisons)

Morgan,EdmundMothersAgainstDrunkDriving(MADD)Moynihan,DanielPatrickMunnerlynn,WilliamMusto,DavidMyrdal,Gunnar

NAACP:legalchallengestoJimCrow;WebsiteNAACPLegalDefenseFundNationalAdvisoryCommissiononCriminalJusticeStandardsandGoals,1973recommendationsNationalCenterforInstitutionsandAlternativesNationalColoredConvention(1853)NationalHouseholdSurveyonDrugAbuseNationalInstituteonDrugAbuseNationalJournalNationalLegalAid&DefenderAssociationNationalSecurityDecisionDirective(Reaganadministration)Nealv.DelawareNewDealNewYorkPoliceDepartment(NYPD)NewYorkTimesNewsweekNicaraguaNietzsche,FriedrichNilsen,EvaNinthCircuitCourtofAppealsNixon,RichardNunn,Dorsey

Obama,Barack;andblackexceptionalism;andByrnegrantprogram;campaignspeechonfatherhoodandpersonalresponsibility;andcracksentencing;anddeathpenalty;presidencyandracialjusticeadvocacy;andWaronDrugs;onwhiteguiltandhistoryofracialdiscriminationO’Connor,JusticeSandraDayOhiov.RobinetteOmi,Michael“OneStrikeandYou’reOut”legislationopen-airdrugmarketsOperationPipeline

Pager,DevahparamilitarydrugraidsParchman,FarmParks,Rosaparoleviolations“passing,”PentagonmilitaryresourcesandWaronDrugsPersonalResponsibilityandWorkOpportunityReconciliationAct(1996)PEWCharitableTrustsPhillips,KevinPiven,FrancesFoxpleabargainingPlessyv.Ferguson“pluralisticignorance,”Poitier,Sidneypolice/police departments and drug-law enforcement; affirmative action andminority officers; consentsearches; and drug forfeiture laws; and federal suits for damages; and financial incentives; and ghettoneighborhoods; lethal chokeholds; paramilitary drug raids and SWAT teams; police brutality; pretextstops; race as factor in decision making; racial profiling; searches and seizures and unreasonablesuspicion;shakedownsandseizures;trafficstops;trainingprograms.Seealsodrug-lawenforcementandracialdiscrimination;WaronDrugsandthecriminaljusticesystemPoorPeople’sMovementPopulistmovementPosseComitatusActpost-arrestlegalservicespostconvictionfees;andpreconvictionservicefees;andprobationrevocationspostprison release (ex-offenders); Chicago; and education; and “gangsta culture,”; ineligibility forfederally funded public assistance; jury exclusion; postconviction fees; public housing discrimination;rearrest rates; reentry programs; the shame and stigma of criminality; voting rights/felonydisenfranchisement;work/employmentPowell,Colinpowell,johna.presidentialelections:anddisenfranchisementofex-felons;andlawandorderrhetoricpretextstopsprisons:admissionsfordrugoffenses;closing;constructionof;corporateandprivateprofiteers; inmatework in; private; rearrest rates and parole and probation violations; and redistricting processes; andresidentialracialsegregation;andviolentcrime(homicide)offendersprobationviolationsprosecutorialdiscretion:crackcocainecases;anddrug-lawenforcement;and juryselection;andracialbiaspublicdefendersystempublichousingagencies/assistancePurkettv.Elm

QualityHousingandWorkResponsibilityAct(1998)

racial caste system in the U.S.; black codes and vagrancy laws; and Civil Rights Movement; andcollectivedenial; andcolorblindness; competing schoolsof thoughton race,poverty, andsocialorder;convictleasingandforcedlabor;endofJimCrowsystem;flawedpublicconsensusatheartof;and“gettoughoncrime”policies;andlanguageofracialcaste;lawandorderrhetoric;new;andphilosophiesofrace relations; and political parties; poor and working class whites; and Populist movement;postemancipationperiod;ReconstructionEra;andRepublicanParty;andslavery;Southern“Redemption”campaign;structural racism;systemsofcontrol/recurringperiodsof transitionanduncertainty.Seealsodrug-law enforcement and racial discrimination; mass incarceration and Jim Crow(parallels/differences);massincarcerationsystem;postprisonrelease;WaronDrugsRacialFormationintheUnitedStates(OmiandWinant)RacialJusticeProjectoftheACLUracialprofiling:andghettocommunities; litigationchallenging;andminoritypoliceofficers;andpolicedecisionmaking;studiesof;andTitleVIof1964CivilRightsAct;trafficstops/pedestrianstopsradicalphilosophyofracerelations(Reconstructionera)rapmusicandhip-hopcultureReagan,Ronald/Reaganadministration;andconservative revolution in theRepublicanParty;andcrackcocaine; financial incentives to law enforcement; legislation and drug policy; and military policing;racializedcampaignrhetoriconcrimeandwelfare;andWaronDrugsrealitytelevisionshows,black-themedReconstructionEra;convictleasingandforcedlabor;federalcivilrightslegislation;philosophiesofracerelations;Populistmovement;andracialsegregation;Southern“Redemption”campaign;votingrightsRector,RickyRay“Redemption”campaignredistrictingandprisonpopulationsReeves,JimmieReformAct(2000)Reinarman,CraigRepublicanPartyRice,CondoleezzaRobertTaylorHomes(Chicago)Robinson,JoAnnGibsonRoosevelt,FranklinD.Rucker,PerlieRuckerv.DavisRuffinv.Commonwealth(Virginia)Runoalds,CliffordRussell,Kathryn

SanFranciscoBantheBoxcampaignsSanJoseMercuryNewsSchmidt,BennoSchnecklothv.BustamonteSchwarzer,WilliamW.Scott,DonaldsearchandseizureSeattlePoliceDepartmentsegregation, racial; and ghetto communities; and prisons;ReconstructionEra; and reentry of ex-felons;residentialsegregationsentencing: and crack cocaine; and juveniles; and mandatory minimums; and plea bargaining; reformefforts;SupremeCourtrulingsandraciallydiscriminatorysentencingSentencingProjectSharpton,AlShelby,Tommie“shooterbias,”Sider,GeraldSiegel,Revaslavery; birth of; and disenfranchisement of black voters; and history of race discrimination in juryselection; and notion of white supremacy; and plantation labor; and poor whites; postemancipationperiod; and role of racial hostility/racial indifference; and symbolic production of race; and U.S.ConstitutionSlaverybyAnotherName(Blackmon)Smith,MaryLouiseSmithv.Allwright(1944)Souter,JusticeDavidH.SouthernCenterforHumanRights“SouthernManifesto,”SouthernStrategySpruill,AlbertaStatesofDenial(Cohen)Steinberg,StephenStevens,JusticeJohnPaulStewart,EmmaFayestigmaofcriminality;andblackyouth;copingstrategiesandlying;andfamiliesofprisoners/ex-felons;and“gangstaculture,”;self-hateintheblackcommunity;shameandsilence;andsymbolicproductionofraceTheStrangeCareerofJimCrow(Woodward)StratfordHighSchool(GooseCreek,SouthCarolina)structuralracismStutman,RobertSupremeCourtrulings:crackcasesanddiscriminatorysentencing;and“drug-courierprofiles,”;drug-lawenforcementandclaimsofracialbias;andendofJimCrowsystem;FourthAmendmentdecisions; juryselection; and majoritarian political process; and mandatory sentencing laws; police searches and

seizures; police traffic stops;policeuseof lethal chokeholds; andpost-arrest legal representation; andprosecutorialdiscretion indrug-lawenforcement;andpublichousing; raceas factor inpolicedecisionmaking;andracialprofiling;andraciallydiscriminatorysentencing.SeealsonamesofindividualcasesSwainv.AlabamaSwank,EricSWAT(SpecialWeaponsandTactics)teams

TemporaryAssistancetoNeedyFamilies(TANF)Terryv.OhioThinkingAboutCrime(Tonry)ThirteenthAmendmentThomas,James“threestrikes”lawsTimemagazineTitleVIoftheCivilRightsAct(1964)Tonry,MichaelTorres,Geraldtraffic stops; and broad discretion for police; consent searches; drug forfeiture laws and seizures; and“drug-courierprofiles,”;andFourthAmendment;andpolicetrainingprograms;pretextstopsTravis,JeremyTuliadrugstingoperation(1999)

unemploymentUnitedNationsHumanRightsCommitteeUnitedStatesv.Brignoni-PonceUnitedStatesv.ReeseUrbanLeaguereport“TheStateofBlackAmerica”(1990)U.S.SentencingCommissionUSAToday

VeraInstituteVillageVoicevoting rights: disenfranchisement of ex-felons; and Fifteenth Amendment; Jim Crow eradisenfranchisement;ReconstructionEra;restorationprocessesforex-felonsVotingRightsAct(1965)

Wacquant,LoïcWalker,HermanWallace,GeorgeWaronDrugs;GeorgeH.W.Bushadministration;Clintonadministration;conspiracytheories;andcrackcocaine;earlyresistancewithinlawenforcement;federalagencies’antidrugfunding;financialincentivestolawenforcement;andgenocide;andinner-cityeconomiccollapse;internalizationof;mediacampaigns;mythsof;Reaganadministration.SeealsoWaronDrugsandthecriminaljusticesystemWar onDrugs and the criminal justice system; arguments that race has always influenced the criminaljusticesystem;andcourtsystem;anddrugforfeiturelaws;“drug-courierprofiles,”;financialincentives;and Fourth Amendment; guilty pleas/ plea bargaining; legal services /legal representation; mandatoryminimumsentencing;paramilitaryraidsandpoliceSWATteams;pretextstops;andracialdiscrimination;trafficstops.Seealsomass incarcerationsystem;police/policedepartmentsanddrug-lawenforcement;postprisonrelease(ex-offenders)WaronPovertyWashington,BookerT.WashingtonPostWatson,TomWeWon’tGoBack(MatsudaandLawrence)Weaver,VeslaWeaver,WarrenWeinstein,Jack“welfarequeens,”welfarereformlegislationWestern,BruceWesternAreaNarcoticsTaskForce(WANT)WhenWorkDisappears(Wilson)“WhereHavetheBlackMenGone?”(2006Ebonyarticle)WhiteCitizens’Councils“whitecrime,”WhiteHouseOfficeofNationalDrugControlwhites: and colorblindness; drug arrests/imprisonment; and drug-law enforcement; and drunk drivingawareness campaigns; endof JimCrowandSouthernwhites’ backlash; ex-offenders; illegal druguse;poorandworking-class;and racialprivilege;andracialprofiling inpolice trafficstops;shift in racialattitudes/support forantidiscriminationprinciples;victimsof racialcastesystem;“whitecrime,”;youthdrugcrimes/illegaldruguseWhren,MichaelWhrenv.UnitedStatesWhyWeCan’tWait:ReversingtheRetreatonCivilRights(October2007conference)Wideman,JohnEdgarWilliams,JohnBellWilson,WilliamJuliusWinant,HowardWinfrey,OprahWolff,Paula

Womack,Willawomen,AfricanAmerican:conflictedviewsaboutcrime;andgendergap;andservice-sectoremploymentWoodward,C.VannWorldWarII

YickWov.HopkinsYoung,IrisMarion

©2010byMichelleAlexanderAllrightsreserved.

Nopartofthisbookmaybereproduced,inanyform,withoutwrittenpermissionfromthepublisher.

Requestforpermissiontoreproduceselectionsfromthisbookshouldbemailedto:PermissionsDepartment,TheNewPress,38Greene

Street,NewYork,NY10013.

PublishedintheUnitedStatesbyTheNewPress,NewYork,2010DistributedbyPerseusDistribution

LIBRARYOFCONGRESSCATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATIONDATA

Alexander,Michelle.ThenewJimCrow:massincarcerationintheageofcolorblindness/MichelleAlexander.p.cm.

Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.eISBN:978-1-595-58530-1

1.Criminaljustice,Administrationof—UnitedStates.2.AfricanAmericanprisoners—UnitedStates.3.Racediscrimination—

UnitedStates.4.UnitedStates—Racerelations.I.Title.HV9950.A4372010

364.973—dc222009022519

TheNewPresswasestablishedin1990asanot-for-profitalternativetothelarge,commericalpublishinghousescurrentlydominatingthebookpublishingindustry.TheNewPressoperatesinthepublicinterestratherthanforprivategain,andiscommittedtopublishing,ininnovative

ways,worksofeducational,cultural,andcommunityvaluethatareoftendeemedinsufficientlyprofitable.

www.thenewpress.com

CompositionbyNKGraphics

ThisbookwassetinFairfieldLHLight