One cannot easily define the concept of justice. Eitzen and Zinn (2006) in their text state," Justice refers to the use of authority to uphold what is lawful in a completely impartial and fair manner" (p.359). The U.S. system of justice attempts to achieve fairness, but it has not been successful. Laws, application of the law by judges, prisons, and law enforcement express bias against certain members of society. A key component of U.S. democracy is that politics influence justice. Most people assume that alleged offenders appear before a neutral judge and jury of their peers.
Justice in the U.S. court system is not so unbiased and straightforward. Richard Quinney, an American sociologist, known for his critical and philosophical approach to social justice and crime emphasized the political aspect of justice. Quinney (1970) in his historical account states," In 1780, the Massachusetts Bill of Rights captured the essence of the ideal: It is essential to the preservation of the rights of every individual, his life, liberty, property, and character, that there be an impartial interpretation of laws and administration of justice" (Woll, 1970, p.516). Our founding fathers wrote a related design into the Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence.
Justice weighs all individuals neutrally on its scales in figurative form. It represents our principles of equality between all citizens. Authorities must administer the law according to an idyllic instead of the experiences of everyday existence. However, the criminal justice system is full of mechanisms that individualize the application of law. The justice system distinguishes cases according to extra legal factors .The structure of justice disguises its operation. Authorities hide the false representation of judicial objectivity. One must analyze execution of justice from an idealistic perspective. Our justice system is political by its nature. The fact authorities repetitively create public policy makes the administration of justice political.
Courts play a critical role in the local political system. Community political views influence laws and cases that enter the courts. Elected officials, prosecution attorneys, and local politics, establish criminal offenses. Jacob and Vines, two political scientists conceptualized the degree to which administration of criminal justice and politics correlate. Jacob and Vines (1963) in their text state,
Elected officials sensitive to the political process charge, prosecute, convict, and sentence criminal defendants. This means that such decisions are made in response to cues from the political structure; thereby the political system provides channels by which local claims and local interest can influence judicial outcomes. In this way, the judiciary helps create the conditions necessary for the reelection of court officials or for their frequent promotion of higher offices in the state or nation. In short, criminal prosecutions provide opportunities for the political system to affect judicial decisions and for the judicial process to provide favors, which nourish political organizations (Jacob and Vines, p.250 Woll, 1975, p.518.).
Disparity
The aim of justice is not easy to comprehend. People think the justice system can provide all of the solutions to crime. Some responses to crime perpetuate the problems. For instance, the three strikes and drug laws increased the prison population. Authorities do not enforce these laws in an unbiased manner. Eitzen and Zinn (2006) in their text state, "Although African Americans comprise approximately 12 percent of the population and 13 percent of all illicit drug users, they make up 38 percent of those arrested for drug offenses and 59 percent of those convicted of drug offenses"(Drug Policy Alliance,2003 Eitzen and Zinn 2006, p.402). In addition, judges express bias when sentencing African Americans. For instance, Eitzen and Zinn (2006) remind us, "of Caucasian drug felons 32 percent are given probation or non incarceration in state courts, compared to 25 percent of Blacks" (U.S. Department of Justice, 2000, Eitzen and Zinn, 2006). These laws bring devastation the African American community.
Poverty
The U.S. is one of the most affluent, racially diverse nations on the planet. Yet, many members of American society live in poverty with little or no access to sufficient food, housing, employment, and health care. These same marginalized members of the community experience bias in the justice system, job market, and education system. Discrimination aggravates their condition. The U.S. spends little money on social expenditures and has a higher child poverty rate than other Western democracies. Eitzen and Zinn (2006) in their text state,"The U.S. increased benefits to the elderly from one-sixth of the federal budget to 30 percent about 300 billion annually" (p.463). Electoral power influences the decision to assist the elderly. However, policy makers did not fund sufficient programs to assist needy families with children. Children do not have electoral power. The children and the elderly should not have to compete for meager resources when they are in need.
Children in the African American community experience extreme poverty. Authorities do not distribute federal aid equally. The federal government assists single- parent families in two ways. Members of the African American community receive Aide to Families with Dependent Children, which the government decreased benefits by 13% since 1970 (Eitzen and Zinn, 2006, p.464). To the contrary, Survivors Insurance, a part of Social Security increased by 53% since 1970 (Eitzen and Zinn, 2006, p.464). Eitzen and Zinn in their text state" Moynihan, writing 8 years before the welfare legislation said:
Those who say we don't care about children in our country, may I note that the average provision for children under SI has been rising five times as fast as average family income since 1970. We do care about some children. We care about majority children. It is minority-children-not only but mostly- who are left behind. (Moyihan, 1988, Eitzen, and Zinn 2006, p.464). Policy makers should make a non-bias response to poverty.
Restorative Justice
Society hold individuals liable for their actions and the damage they cause. Revenge, retribution, just deserts, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation or reformation, and restoration are the goals of criminal sentencing. This work will focus rehabilitation and restorative justice. Schmalleger and Smykla (2006) in their text state," The goal of rehabilitation or reformation is to change criminal lifestyles into law-abiding ones" (p.76). Offenders meet the goal of rehabilitation when he or she modifies their behavior in order to become a law- abiding, productive members of society.
Rehabilitation concentrates on social skills training, psychological and mental treatment designed to address the causes that led to crime. Reintegrating the offender back into the community is sub goal of rehabilitation. Offenders who respond to rehabilitation can contribute to the well-being of the community. Restorative justice, a recently new goal of sentencing has emerged. Restoration involves the restoration of justice for individuals who commit crime and victims of crime. Restorative justice addresses the harm against the state, community, and the victim. Judges and juries who consider impact statements during sentencing utilize a restorative justice philosophy. The principles of restorative justice not the activity itself distinguishes it from the other goals of sentencing. Restorative justice establishes dignity to and reintegrates victims of crime.
Conclusion
Members of the African American community do not experience justice in a fair unbiased manner. I believe fairness is the goal of our justice system. However, biases persist across the entire gamut of the justice system. Society holds individuals accountable for their actions and the injury they cause. Revenge, retribution, just deserts, incapacitation, rehabilitation, and restoration are the goals of criminal sentencing. Restorative justice, an innovative goal of sentencing emerged that emerged in the 1970s. Dorne (2008) in his text states "In the United States, restorative justice began in the form of two kinds of policy initiatives: victim-offender mediation and prison reentry programs" (p.62). Critics of the traditional retributive justice model developed the restorative movement as an alternative way to address bias and other concerns. Restorative justice involves the restoration of criminal offenders and victims of crime. It addresses the harm against the state, victim, and the community. The underlying principle of restorative justice not the activity it self distinguish it from other goals of sentencing. The restoration model can improve our traditional retributive style of justice because it includes three institutions as pillars-the church, family, and the community that serve as the core of any society.
