IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jnlpup/v44y2024i3p459-483_1.html

The limits of criminal justice reform: an analysis of elite rhetoric in four cities

Author

Listed:
  • Tatz, Erin
  • Bekele, Helen
  • Mattioli, Lauren
  • Piston, Spencer

Abstract

As the coronavirus pandemic swept the nation in 2020, many emphasized that carceral spaces were hotspots for the virus, leaving Black and Brown people especially vulnerable to infection. In combination with other critiques of racism in the carceral state, these observations created pressure to decarcerate, especially on the political left. How did political elites discuss the carceral state in this changed atmosphere? To answer this question, we analyze rhetoric in public statements across four liberal metropolitan areas during the spring and summer of 2020. In these statements, we find a long-standing discourse of racially paternalist penal welfarism, retrofitted to pandemic times and accompanied by a distinction between “deserving” and “undeserving” criminals. Accommodating portrayals of incarcerated people as vulnerable to COVID-19 and in desperate need of care, this pattern of rhetoric positioned the carceral state as a protector in order to justify continued incarceration.

Suggested Citation

  • Tatz, Erin & Bekele, Helen & Mattioli, Lauren & Piston, Spencer, 2024. "The limits of criminal justice reform: an analysis of elite rhetoric in four cities," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 459-483, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:44:y:2024:i:3:p:459-483_1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0143814X23000375/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jnlpup:v:44:y:2024:i:3:p:459-483_1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/pup .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.