Photo by Hédi Benyounes
This is the final post in a 3-part series in which I’m declaring Mass Incarceration to be a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions in America. If you haven’t read Part 1 on how the problem got to be so massive, you may want to start there. And if you haven’t read Part 2 on how race and imprisonment are so deeply intertwined, go back and check that out! But I couldn’t just end things there. Because those who know me know that I’m not one to just talk about (or write about!) problems and challenges without also trying to suggest some solutions!
In fairness, none of these are my original ideas. There are plenty of individuals and organizations who have been committed to criminal justice reform for a long time and are pushing for these ideas. I’m simply trying to do my part to spread the word and highlight some opportunities that I’ve come to learn about in hopes it might resonate with others. Because I think it’s up to us, all of us, to get involved and do our part by demanding the change we want to see if things have any hope of getting better. This isn’t meant to be an exhaustive list of the solutions that are needed. These are just a few ideas that perhaps can serve as a starting place for discussions.
Also, I believe Mass Incarceration in America is a humanitarian crisis, one that requires immediate aid as well as simultaneous redevelopment to some of the foundational framework if sustainable long-term change is ever to be achieved. It’s too simplistic to suggest we must decide to spend our energy and resources on either addressing current needs of those who are suffering or overhauling the system to create a healthier and more sustainable future for all people. It shouldn’t be a matter of either/or. It can be a matter of both/and. Some of these ideas are meant to address immediate problems of the day and others are intended to reframe our thinking and culture when it comes to the judicial system.
THE CHANGE WE NEED
We need reform when it comes to law enforcement tactics. Before anyone ever sets foot in a jail or a prison, they must first be arrested. Which means, if we decrease the number of initial encounters between civilians and law enforcement, we can have an immediate reduction in the number of arrests. One way to achieve this is through mandatory training that exposes and deconstructs biases, racial and otherwise. Such training should also be required for all judges, district attorneys, and anyone else who is involved in the criminal justice system and plays a role in people being incarcerated for any length of time.
But such training only hopes to change the hearts and minds of individuals. And while that’s incredibly helpful and important, it isn’t necessarily required to achieve change. That can be done through properly executed policy. After all, it is policies that dictate the terms, even if people disagree. Just look at the Civil Rights Act of 1964. There were plenty who were opposed to it, but it was still enacted. I believe we need policies to address sentencing disparities based on race. The idea of sentencing guidelines may sound similar to mandatory minimums from decades ago, a policy that contributed heavily to Mass Incarceration. I’m not necessarily calling for them to be reinstated, but I also don’t think the problem was so much that we imposed mandatory minimums so much as the minimums were so long. I’m simply calling for some reform that can assess and impose sentences that are more equitable and just. Or perhaps we should just always allow judges to make the final ruling. Because there are often judges who would prefer to overrule harsh mandatory sentences but aren’t able to. And isn’t that their job, after all? To judge? To assess situations and deliver just and fair punishments? With bias training, revised sentencing guidelines, and impartial judges determining sentences, we might begin to see improvements with sentence disparities by race while also shortening the drastic lengths some convicted offenders are being sentenced away for.
We also need to address the extremely high rate of plea bargains! As I said in part 2, it’s not reasonable to assume that 97% of the 51,967 arrests made in Georgia in 2017 were guilty. Now, imagine if every single one of those arrested demanded their right to trial. Courts would be backed up with cases. It could take decades to get through them, not to mention the arrests being made in the meantime, causing the entire system to come to a halt! This is why many believe district attorneys push for an excessive amount of plea bargains. They know they don’t have the time or resources to research and prepare for a case that will likely lead to a guilty verdict if every one of them went to trial. But, if they can get alleged offenders to accept plea bargains, they don’t have to. Plus, plea bargains qualify as guilty verdicts so their conviction rates remain high, and they’re likely to get reelected under the promise of keeping communities safe!
But not everyone accepts a plea bargain simply because of the pressure from District Attorneys. Some do it simply to get out of jail, to escape the physical and psychological trauma. The potential of a month-long lockdown and being confined to a cell for 23 hours and 45 minutes a day is so horrifying that it can easily make someone admit guilt even for something they didn’t do! That’s what happened in my home county’s jail back in 2019. Cobb County inmates were unable to contact family and only permitted out of their cell for 15 minutes each day to shower. And in nearby Clayton County, another inmate died only hours after sneaking to make a phone call to beg his mother to get him out because he was being constantly beaten and kept in a cell for 23 hours a day.
But suppose someone is willing to take a stand. Even in the face of an attorney who threatens someone with a long sentence if found guilty at trial but a much shorter one with a plea deal, suppose someone is courageous enough to refuse to admit guilt and demand their day in court. Who’s to say they won’t tragically end up like Kalief Browder. Kalief was arrested in 2010, at the age of 16 for allegedly stealing a backpack. Without ever facing trial, he was imprisoned for 3 years at Rikers Island, with two of those years in solitary confinement! Kalief claimed he was innocent the entire time and refused to accept a guilty plea despite being told several times he would be allowed to go home if he just accepted the deal and said he was guilty. He was adamant. He was never going to admit guilt for something he didn’t do. And he didn’t, even though it meant being subjected to Rikers Island, which is notorious for its violence and harrowing conditions. And Kalief was subjected to it for years, as a teenager no less! Eventually, after years of delayed court hearings, the prosecution finally admitted it didn’t have sufficient evidence to pursue a case against Kalief, and he was released in 2013 with the charges dropped. But it was too late. The damage had already been done, and the experience took an overwhelming toll on Kalief’s mental health. He took his own life 2 years after his release.
That’s why the issue is not just about decreasing the number of plea bargains and demanding one’s right to a trial. It’s about demanding one’s right to a speedy trial! That’s one of the many ways the system failed Browder. No one should be confined to jail (or prison in his case!) for 3 years for an alleged offense without ever having a trial. So we either need more judges and prosecutors available and prepared to conduct more trials at a swifter pace or…
We need to end cash bail. If our current system is so constrained by a lack of prosecutors and judges that it takes years to prepare for a case over a stolen backpack, why should someone be forced to pay money simply to get out of jail? Or be forced to remain incarcerated in the meantime because they’re too poor to pay? Why is someone’s threat-level to society governed by how much money they have? And to those skeptical of releasing violent offenders from jail, what about the estimated 500,000 people in jail right for non-violent offenses? That’s 74% of the entire jail population!
I also believe we should consider releasing some prisoners who are currently serving sentences for non-violent offenses. Many are incarcerated right now for drug offenses that are no longer crimes thanks to recent drug legislation. And in some instances where it is still illegal, the punishment doesn’t always fit the crime. A man in Illinois was found with 4.1 grams of crack in his own home, but since he lived within 1,000 feet of a park and was already a habitual offender, he was given a life sentence in prison. Another man in Missouri was caught trying to buy several pounds of marijuana but, given his habitual offender status, was given a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Thankfully, his sentence was eventually commuted and he was released, but not before he served 21 years in prison! Again, we may want to believe these stories are uncommon, but I don’t believe that’s the case. And, yes, the man in Missouri was released, and that’s to be celebrated. But what about the thousands of other non-violent drug offenders who are being punished so harshly? Why are we criminalizing people for such behavior instead of addressing addiction, poverty and other underlying causes that can lead to drug dependency?
Lastly, we need to consider reducing the length of time people are on parole and probation, especially for those who were already incarcerated and served time for an offense. Being on parole can prevent someone from being able to vote, and some people are on parole or probation for years. Living with the constant fear of making a minor mistake (such as a traffic violation) or just being accused of making another mistake and getting arrested only to be sent back to a place rife with physical and psychological abuse can be traumatic. As of 2019, there were an estimated 4.5 million people on probation or parole. That’s more than twice the number of people incarcerated in facilities. Which means, approximately 6.5 million individuals in America are either incarcerated in a facility or under some form of government supervision. That’s approximately 2% of adults or 1 out of every 50 in the country!
CONCLUSION
The declared ambition of the carceral system in the United States may be to rehabilitate and prepare inmates for successfully reintegration back into society after their release, but the high rate of recidivism suggests that adequate rehabilitation isn’t actually happening. If we’re to be critical of Mass Incarceration in America, we shouldn’t focus primarily on a facility’s declared intentions but the actual outcomes and effect it has on those confined to it. Lauding jails and prisons as humane facilities with good intentions is naïve, at best, and disingenuous, at worst, considering they are home to over 2 million people in this country. The reality is, prisoners are often confined to small and overcrowded cells with inadequate conditions where physical suffering, either at the hands of prison staff or fellow prisoners, is rampant. Long-term exposure to these environments is known to be detrimental to one’s mental health and can lead to or perpetuate pre-existing conditions like anxiety, depression, delusions, etc. We need solutions that offer immediate aid as well as to develop sustainable improvements for the long-term.
Racial bias training for all involved in the criminal justice system, the implementation of sentencing guidelines for convicted offenders, shortening the length of probation and parole for offenders who have been released, and abolishing cash bail for those arrested for non-violent offenses are all examples of developmental aid we should consider. And immediate aid can be provided to approximately 500,000 people if we just release all who are being held pre-trial for non-violent offenses.
However, to be very clear, all of these potential solutions only seek to help those who are incarcerated, and this humanitarian crisis threatens the health, safety, and well-being of so many more than just inmates. Communities are being devastated. Families are being destroyed. The suffering is widespread and extends to husbands, wives, sons, daughters, friends and partners. Beyond the physical and psychological burden on those involved, this doesn’t even begin to address the financial burden imposed on those same communities who fund these state and federally run facilities through tax dollars! Nor does it speak to the need to abolish the death penalty and Bryan Stevenson’s powerful idea that perhaps we should focus less time on whether someone “deserves to die” and more on whether “we deserve to kill.”
All these reasons are why, in my opinion, Mass Incarceration truly is a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions in America. One that demands our attention and solutions.