1 Licensed to: CengageBrain User
2 This is an electronic version of the print textbook. Due to electronic rights restrictions, some third party content may be suppressed. Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. The publisher reserves the right to remove content from this title at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. For valuable information on pricing, previous editions, changes to current editions, and alternate formats, please visit to search by ISBN#, author, title, or keyword for materials in your areas of interest.
3 The Color of Justice: Race, Ethnicity, and Crime in America, Fifth Edition Samuel Walker, Cassia Spohn, Miriam DeLone Senior Publisher: Linda Schreiber-Ganster Acquisition Editor: Carolyn Henderson Meier Editorial Assistant: Virginette Acacio Media Editor: Andy Yap Marketing Manager: Marcia Locke Marketing Coordinator: Sean Foy Senior Marketing Communication Manager: Heather Baxley Manufacturing Director: Marcia Locke Content Project Management: PreMediaGlobal Art Director: Maria Epes Print Buyer: Karen Hunt Rights Acquisitions Specialist Text & Images: Dean Dauphinais Cover Designer: Riezebos Holzbaur/Tae Hatayama Cover Photo Credit: Steve Allen Compositor: PreMediaGlobal 2012, 2009, 2007 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, digitizing, taping, Web distribution, information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher. For product information and technology assistance, contact us at Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, For permission to use material from this text or product, submit all requests online at Further permissions questions can be ed to Library of Congress Control Number: Student Edition: ISBN-13: ISBN-10: Wadsworth 20 Davis Drive Belmont, CA USA Cengage Learning is a leading provider of customized learning solutions with office locations around the globe, including Singapore, the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Brazil and Japan. Locate your local office at Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd. For your course and learning solutions, visit Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our preferred online store Printed in the United States of America
4 1 Race, Ethnicity, and Crime American s Continuing Crisis GOALS OF THE CHAPTER After you have read this chapter: 1. You will understand the basic goals of the book as a whole. 2. You will have an understanding of how race and ethnicity are central to understanding crime and criminal justice in America. 3. You will be able to discuss recent trends in criminal justice, the current crime situation in America, emerging problems in the criminal justice system, and how all of these factors affect race, ethnicity, and justice. 4. You will be familiar with the difference between race and ethnicity. You will also understand whether or not these are really scientific categories, and how they are used by the U.S. Census Bureau and by criminal justice agencies. 5. You will understand the quality of commonly used criminal justice data (for example, arrests) and whether they provide an accurate picture of what actually happens in the justice system. 6. You will be able to discuss the difference between disparities and discrimination with regard to race and ethnicity. Race, Ethnicity, and Justice in America More than 100 years ago, the great African American scholar W. E. B. Du Bois declared, The problem of the twentieth century is the problem of the color line. 1 Racism and racial discrimination, he argued, were the central problems facing modern society. 1
5 2 CHAPTER 1 Who is Juanita? Much the same can be said about crime and justice in American society today. Nearly every problem related to criminal justice issues involves matters of race and ethnicity, including arrests, sentencing, corrections, involvement in crime, and public trust and confidence in the criminal justice system. Some examples include: With respect to race and ethnicity, Who or what am I? Am I white? Black? Latino? How would I know? Is it just what I say I am? Or is it what someone else calls me? Or what label the government places on me? These questions are fundamental to an intelligent discussion of race, ethnicity, and justice in America. We cannot begin to discuss whether or not there are inequalities or whether discrimination exists unless we have accurate data on how people of different races or ethnicities are treated in the justice system. Many people mistakenly think the answers to these questions are easy. They are not. Consider, for example, the case of Juanita, as discussed in the report Donde esta la justicia? Her father is Puerto Rican and her mother is African American. How would she be classified if she were arrested? In Arizona she would define her own race or ethnicity. In California she would be counted as African American. In Michigan she would be classified as Hispanic and then be assigned to a racial group. In Ohio she would be recorded as biracial. In short, we have a serious problem. This chapter is designed to help navigate our way through this very complex but very basic issue. SOURCE: Adapted from Building Blocks for Youth, Donde esta la justicia? (East Lansing: Michigan State University, 2002). In 2009 the incarceration rate for African American males in state and federal prisons was 6.7 times the rate for whites (4,749 versus 708, respectively, per 100,000). The incarceration rate for Hispanic American males was 2.6 times greater than for whites (1,822 per 100,000). There were also disparities in the incarceration of white and African American females, but not as great as for males. 2 A 2010 Arizona law directing local police to check the immigration status of anyone they suspected to be undocumented created a national controversy and several lawsuits challenging the law. Critics charged that it would inevitably lead to ethnic profiling against Hispanic and Latino people. Rates of rape and sexual assault against Native American women are higher than for either white or African American women. Effective criminal justice responses to crimes against Native Americans, moreover, are complicated by jurisdictional problems arising from the unique legal status of Native American tribes as sovereign nations. 3 Racial profiling the allegation that police officers stop African American drivers or pedestrians because of the color of their skin and not because of actual violations of laws continues to be a national controversy. The issue was
6 RACE, ETHNICITY, AND CRIME 3 highlighted in 2009 when Cambridge, Massachusetts, police arrested Harvard Professor Henry Louis Gates for disturbing the peace at his home. 4 In 2007, 19 percent of American Muslims said they faced discrimination, and 15 percent said they felt Americans viewed Muslims as terrorists. 5 Sex trafficking holding people in bondage for purposes of commercial sex is an international problem that involves perhaps over 2 million people a year worldwide. 6 In the United States, the principal victims of sex trafficking are immigrants from Asia, Africa, or Eastern Europe; that is, people of all different races and ethnicities who are exploited because of their desperation to come to the United States. The Innocence Project has found that among prisoners exonerated by DNA evidence, 70 percent are people of color: 61 percent African American; 30 percent non-hispanic white; and 1 percent Asian. 7 Since the mid-1960s, crime has been a central issue in American politics. For many white Americans, the crime issue is an expression of racial fears: fear of victimization by African American offenders and fear of racial integration of neighborhoods. For its 2001 annual report on The State of Black America, The National Urban League surveyed 800 African Americans. One question asked, In general, do you think the criminal justice system in the United States is biased in favor of blacks, is it biased against blacks, or does it generally give blacks fair treatment? Seventy-four percent of the respondents thought that it is biased against African Americans, whereas only 15 percent thought that the system is fair. 8 In short, on both sides of the color line, there are suspicion and fear: a sense of injustice on the part of racial minorities and fear of black crime on the part of whites. American society is deeply polarized over the issues of crime, justice, and race. This polarization of attitudes toward crime is especially strong with respect to the death penalty. In 2009, 52 percent of African Americans opposed the death penalty for persons convicted of murder, compared with 27 percent of whites. (In previous polls, Latino Americans fell somewhere in between whites and African Americans). 9 Fear of crime is higher among people of color for some crimes than it is for whites. In 2009 more African Americans expressed fear of getting mugged (an armed robbery) than whites (37 versus 28 percent). This is a legitimate concern, because African Americans are in fact victims of robbery at a higher rate than whites. 10 At the same time, for many whites, crime is a code word for fears of social change, and fears of racial change in particular. A study of community crime control efforts in Chicago, for example, found that neighborhood organizations usually were formed in response to perceived changes in the racial composition of their neighborhoods. 11 IS DISCRIMINATION JUST A MYTH? Some critics, however, argue that the criminal justice system is not racist, and that allegations of systematic discrimination are based on myth. One of the most forceful advocates of this position is Heather MacDonald, a fellow at the
7 4 CHAPTER 1 Manhattan Institute. She argues that the primary cause of the high rate of incarceration of African Americans is involvement in criminal behavior, not discrimination by the criminal justice system. 12 MacDonald s argument frames the issues we will examine in this book. What are the facts regarding criminal behavior and the performance of the criminal justice system? Is there systematic discrimination, or not? If discrimination exists but is not systematic, how do we characterize it? What accounts for racial and ethnic disparities in arrest rates and imprisonment rates? In her article, Is the Criminal-Justice System Racist? MacDonald makes the following arguments: The homicide rate among African Americans is seven times higher than among white non-hispanic Americans (and since murder is a crime most likely to result in a prison sentence, that explains part of the imprisonment disparity). African Americans represent 56 percent of all robbery arrests (in 2008 it was 52 percent according to the Uniform Crime Reports from the FBI) and about 40 percent of all arrests for violent crime arrests (again, these are crimes most likely to result in a prison sentence). Victimization studies have found a parity between the reported race of robbers and offenders committing aggravated assault and the race of arrestees for these crimes (suggesting no discrimination in arrests). A 1994 Justice Department study of felony cases found that African Americans arrested for a felony had a lower chance of being prosecuted and a lesser chance of being convicted at trial than whites. 13 Statements by some of the leading criminologists (for example, Michael Tonry) that differences in criminal offending by race and ethnicity and not discrimination account for the large racial disparities in prison population. MacDonald s points are based on solid criminological data, and for that reason must be taken seriously. But are they the last word on the subject? After all, statistics can be interpreted in many different ways. This is not saying that MacDonald has misused them in a dishonest way. One of the main issues we will deal with in this book is that facts do not speak for themselves. On all of the most important issues, there are often conflicting data and legitimate differences of opinion among experts about how data should be interpreted. There are some important issues that MacDonald does not cite that present a very different picture. They include: With respect to drugs, arrests of African Americans and Latinos far exceed reported drug usage compared with whites. 14 The fact that African Americans arrested for felonies are less likely to be prosecuted and less likely to be convicted at trial may be explained by the fact that they may be arrested on weaker evidence. Some research suggests that the apparent leniency in later stages of the system represents decisions that correct for inappropriate arrest decisions. 15
8 RACE, ETHNICITY, AND CRIME 5 The higher rates of offending among African Americans and Latinos can be explained by inequalities in the American social system that are criminogenic: disparities in education, employment, health care, and so on. (We discuss this in detail in Chapter 3.) People of color are victimized by violent and property crimes at a higher rate than white Americans. This is partly because they live in neighborhoods where robbers and burglars live, and thus are convenient targets, and also because of the failure of local criminal justice systems to develop effective responses to the problems of drugs, gangs, domestic violence, and other crimes. The last point raises an issue that is central to this book. As our subtitle indicates, our purpose here is to examine race, ethnicity, and crime. We want to take a big picture view, looking at all the factors related to crime. It is a mistake to examine only what happens within the criminal justice system. Chapter 3 is devoted to these very important external social and economic factors. THE SCOPE OF THIS BOOK This book offers a comprehensive, critical, and balanced examination of the issues of crime and justice with respect to race and ethnicity. We believe that none of the existing books on the subject is completely adequate. 16 First, other books do not offer a comprehensive treatment of all the issues on crime and the administration of criminal justice. There are many excellent articles and books on particular topics, such as the death penalty or police use of deadly force, but none cover the full range of topics in a complete and critical fashion. As a result, there are often no discussions of whether relatively more discrimination exists at one point in the justice system than at others. For example, is there more discrimination by the police in making arrest decisions than, say, by prosecutors in charging? Harvard University s Christopher Stone points out that our knowledge about most criminal justice issues is uneven. 17 There are many important questions about which we just do not have good information. Second, the treatment of race and ethnicity in criminal justice textbooks is very weak. They do not identify race and ethnicity as a major issue or clarify the difference between race and ethnicity, and they fail to incorporate important literature on police misconduct, felony sentencing, the employment of racial minorities, and other important topics. 18 Third, few books or articles discuss all racial and ethnic groups. Most focus entirely on African Americans. Coramae Richey Mann points out that the available studies focus primarily on African Americans and neglect other racial minorities. 19 Although research on Hispanic Americans has been growing in recent years, there are still major gaps in our knowledge. There is still little good research on Native Americans or Asian Americans. The Color of Justice includes material on all groups, along with material on Americans of Middle
9 6 CHAPTER 1 Eastern origin, who, in the wake of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, allege that they have been the victims of racial profiling and other forms of discrimination. An important contribution of this book is to highlight the significant differences between the experiences of various racial and ethnic groups with respect to crime and justice. African Americans and Latinos, for example, have different experiences with the police and different attitudes toward their local police departments. The experience of Native Americans is completely different from those two groups. In this regard, The Color of Justice takes a contextual approach and emphasizes the unique historical, political, and economic circumstances of each group. Alfredo Mirandé, author of Gringo Justice, argues that historically a double standard of justice has existed, one for Anglo Americans and one for Chicanos. 20 Marianne O. Nielsen, meanwhile, argues that the subject of Native Americans and criminal justice cannot be understood without recognizing that it is just one of many interrelated issues that face native peoples today, including political power, land, economic development, [and] individual despair. 21 Additionally, this book takes into account the many other contexts that affect crime and justice: regional differences (the southeast versus the rest of the country), urban versus rural; differences in local political cultures that affect the quality of the police, how courts operate, and the use of the death penalty. Because there has been little comparative research, it is often difficult to make useful comparisons of the experiences of different groups. We do not know, for example, whether Hispanic Americans are treated worse, better, or about the same as African Americans. We have chosen to title this book The Color of Justice because it covers all people of color. Fourth, this book keeps up with the important recent changes in criminal justice. Just since the last edition, a number of important changes have occurred. These include: Congress in 2010 reduced the 100-to-1 disparity in federal sentences for crack versus powder cocaine. Since the federal sentencing guidelines were adopted in 1987, many analysts have argued that the 100-to-1 disparity has had a terribly disparate impact on African Americans. 22 New York State in 2009 revised the 1973 Rockefeller Drug Laws, which imposed very severe sentences and had a disparate impact on racial and ethnic minorities. 23 The immigration and crime debate has suddenly emerged as a major political issue in America (see the detailed discussion later in this chapter). The Mexican drug cartels have surfaced as a major problem, creating a problem of narco-terrorism that has serious effects on the United States as well as Mexico. 24 In 2009 the number of prisoners in state prisons declined for the first time in 38 years. A report by the Pew Center on the States found that part of the reason is that several states have adopted policies to reduce the use of imprisonment. Although the motive has been to control costs, the impact on racial and ethnic minority communities is significant. 25
10 RACE, ETHNICITY, AND CRIME 7 In July 2010 Congress passed the Tribal Law and Order Act, which made a number of major changes in the criminal justice systems on Native American reservations. Previous law limited tribal courts to sentencing offenders to no more than one year in prison. The new law raised the limit to three years, letting judges give appropriate sentences to people who have committed serious violent offenses. Fifth, this book offers a critical perspective on the available evidence, something that few other books on the subject do. Data on arrests and sentencing, for example, are extremely complex. Interpreting traffic stop data to determine if there is racial profiling is a major issue among criminologists. There is an important distinction between disparities and discrimination (see the discussion later in this chapter). Other books often gloss over these complexities. We have already applied a critical analysis to Heather MacDonald s argument that racism in the criminal justice system is a myth. We provide a critical analysis of the other side of the argument as well, examining closely the evidence her critics cite. We do the same with the data offered by both sides in the debate over immigration and crime. In the end, we disagree with Heather MacDonald s argument that racism in the criminal justice system is a myth. 26 Our analysis of the data finds that she ignores several important points and selectively interprets some data without presenting alternative explanations. Our view is that abundant evidence on racial and ethnic disparities in the administration of justice can only be explained in terms of biased attitudes and practices. We also reject Christopher Stone s conclusion, in his report to the President s Initiative on Race, that there is strong reason for optimism regarding race, ethnicity, and criminal justice. 27 The authors of this book are not quite so optimistic. There are indeed some areas of progress in the direction of greater equality and fairness in the criminal justice system. The employment of African Americans and Latinos in the justice system has made some real progress. At the same time, however, persistent patterns of racial and ethnic disparities remain. Discrimination appears to be deeply rooted in the application of the death penalty, for example. Finally, as Darnell F. Hawkins points out, American sociologists and criminologists have done a very poor job of studying the relationship of race, ethnicity, and crime. In particular, there is an absence of solid theoretical work that would provide a comprehensive explanation for this extremely important phenomenon. The main reason for this, Hawkins argues, is that public discourse about both crime and race in the United States has always been an ideological and political mine field. 28 On the one side, racist theories of biological determinism attribute high rates of crime among racial and ethnic minorities to genetic inferiority. On the other side, the mainstream of American criminology has downplayed racial differences in criminal behavior and emphasized the inadequacy of official crime data. The extreme sensitivity of the subject has tended to discourage rather than stimulate the development of theoretical studies of race, ethnicity, and crime.
11 8 CHAPTER 1 OBJECTIVES OF THE BOOK The Color of Justice has several objectives. First, it presents the best and most recent research on the relevant topics: the patterns of criminal behavior and victimization, police practices, court processing and sentencing, the death penalty, and prisons and other correctional programs. Second, it offers a critical interpretation of the existing data and addresses the key questions: Is there systematic discrimination in the criminal justice system? Can patterns of discrimination be explained better in terms of contextual discrimination? What does that term mean? If this pattern exists, where do we find it? How serious is it? What are the causes? Have any reforms succeeded in reducing it? Third, The Color of Justice offers a multiracial and multiethnic view of crime and justice issues. The United States is comprised of many different races, ethnic groups, and cultural lifestyles. Unfortunately, most of the research has ignored the rich diversity of contemporary society. There is a great deal of research on African Americans and criminal justice but relatively little on Hispanics, Native Americans, and Asian Americans. In addition, much of the criminal justice research confuses race and ethnicity. This book clarifies the distinction between the two, examining the impact of crime and justice. Finally, The Color of Justice does not attempt to offer a comprehensive theory of the relationship of race, ethnicity, and crime. Although Hawkins makes a persuasive case for the need for such a theory, this book has a more limited objective. It seeks to lay the groundwork for a comprehensive theory by emphasizing the general patterns in the administration of justice with respect to race and ethnicity. We feel that the available evidence permits us to draw some conclusions about that subject. The development of a comprehensive theory will have to be the subject of a future book. THE COLORS OF AMERICA: RACIAL AND ETHNIC CATEGORIES The United States is increasingly a multiracial, multiethnic society. Findings from the 2010 census had not yet been released as this is written (you can probably check them now), but the 2008 estimates are reliable. The American population in 2008 was, by race, 65.4 percent non-hispanic white, 12.1 percent Black or African American, 1 percent Native American, and 0.3 percent Asian/Pacific Islander. With regard to race, 12.5 percent reported Hispanic ethnicity. 29 These figures represent significant changes from 30 years ago, and demographers are predicting steady changes in the immediate future. As Figure 1.1 indicates, Hispanics are the fastest-growing racial or ethnic group in the United States, increasing from 6.4 percent of the population in 1980 to an estimated 17.8 percent by the year As we will discuss later in a section called The Geography of Justice, the racial and ethnic population is unevenly distributed, with important effects on crime and justice.
12 RACE, ETHNICITY, AND CRIME 9 Percentage (%) White/Non-Hispanic African American Hispanic Asian NOTE: Figures add up to more than 100% because Hispanics may be of either white or African American race. F I G U R E 1.1 U.S. Population, (projected) SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census. Interim Projections by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin (Washington, DC: Bureau of the Census, March 2004). Racial and Ethnic Categories Race and ethnicity are extremely complex and controversial subjects. The categories the Census Bureau and other government agencies use, and that most people use in everyday conversation, are problematic and do not accurately reflect the reality of American life. Much of the data we will use in this book is from the U.S. census. It is very important to understand that the census is based on self-reported identity. Are you black or white? It depends on what you say you are. Are you Hispanic or not? It depends on your own self-identity. A Pew Center report, Who s Hispanic, explains this issue through a series of questions and answers. For example: Q. My mom is from Chile and my dad is from Iowa. I was born in Des Moines. Am I Hispanic? A. You are if you say so. 30 Race Traditionally, race has referred to the major biological divisions of mankind, which are distinguished by color of skin, color and texture of hair, bodily proportions, and other physical features. 31 The traditional approach identifies three major racial groups: Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. Anthropologists and sociologists do not accept the strict biological definition of race. Because of intermarriage and evolution over time, it is virtually impossible to identify exclusive racial categories. Scientists have not been able to determine meaningful differences among people who are referred to as white, black, and Asian. J. Milton Yinger maintains that we cannot accept the widespread belief that there are a few clearly distinct and nearly immutable races. Change and intermixture are continuous. 32 Experts regard the concept of race as primarily a social construct. 33 That is to say, groups define themselves and have labels applied to them by other groups. Usually, the politically and culturally dominant group in any society defines the labels that are applied to other groups. At times, however, subordinate groups
13 10 CHAPTER 1 assert themselves by developing their own labels. Racial designations have changed over the centuries as a result of changes in both political power and racial attitudes. Yinger argues that the critical categories for social analysis are the socially visible racial lines, based on beliefs about race and on administrative and political classifications, rather than genetic differences. 34 A good example of the politics of racial categories is the history of the classification and labeling of African American people in the United States. Historically, the attitudes of whites and official policy embodied the racist drop of blood theory: anyone with the slightest African ancestry was defined as black, even when a majority of that person s ancestors were white or Caucasian. 35 Following this approach, many datasets in the past used the categories of white and nonwhite. The federal government today prohibits the use of the nonwhite label. 36 The problem with traditional racial categories is obvious when we look at American society. Many people have mixed ancestry. What, for example, is the race of the child whose father is African American and mother is of Irish American heritage? Or the child whose mother is Japanese American and whose father is of European background? Or the child whose mother is Native American and whose father is Hispanic? Many white Americans have some ancestors who were African American or Native American. Few African Americans have ancestries that are purely African. Issues related to classifying multiracial and multiethnic people are not abstract ideas; they have very real, and often cruel, human meaning. An article in the New Yorker magazine highlighted the case of Susan Graham of Roswell, Georgia, who complained, When I received my 1990 census form, I realized that there was no race category for my children. She is white, and her husband is African American. She called the Census Bureau and was finally told that children should take the race of their mother. No rational reason was given about why the race of her husband, the children s father, should be arbitrarily ignored. Then, when she enrolled the children in kindergarten, the school classified them as black. Thus, she pointed out, My child has been white on the United States census, black at school, and multiracial at home all at the same time. 37 The bureaucratic problems related to classification of people have important human implications. Classification systems label people and inevitably tend to imply that some groups are inferior to others. The Association of MultiEthnic Americans and related groups are particularly concerned about the impact of classifications and labels on children. 38 The problem of classifying multiethnic and multiracial people has important implications for criminal justice data. What if the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) calls the Graham household? Would their household be classified as white or black? What if one of their children were the victim of a robbery? Would the victimization survey record that as a white or black victimization? Members of the major racial and ethnic groups are divided among themselves about which term they prefer. The National Urban League surveyed 800
14 RACE, ETHNICITY, AND CRIME 11 Focus on an Issue The Bell Curve Controversy: Race and IQ A national storm of controversy erupted in the fall of 1994 over a book titled The Bell Curve by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray. 39 The authors argue that success in life is determined largely by IQ: the smarter people succeed, whereas those with lower intelligence, as measured by standard IQ tests, fail and end up at the bottom of the social scale. The authors contend that those at the low end of the IQ scale do poorly in school and are more likely to be unemployed, receive welfare, and commit crime. The Bell Curve is now over 15 years old, but we need to examine it because the issue of race and IQ continues to arise, and many stereotypes are an ingrained part of popular folklore. Let us sort our way through the myths and misunderstandings and get at the truth. The most provocative and controversial parts of Herrnstein and Murray s thesis are the points that intelligence is inherited and that there are significant differences in intelligence between races. The authors cite data indicating that Asian Americans consistently score higher on IQ tests than white European Americans, who, in turn, score higher than African Americans. Herrnstein and Murray are very clear about the policy implications of their argument: because intelligence is mainly inherited, social programs designed to improve the performance of poor children, such as Head Start, are doomed to failure and should be abandoned. The Bell Curve was attacked by psychologists, anthropologists, and sociologists, among others. 40 Critics disputed the authors assumptions that there is some entity called intelligence that is inherited and that IQ tests are a valid measure of intellectual capacity. Critics also disputed the authors handling of the evidence regarding intelligence tests, the impact of environmental factors as opposed to inherited factors, and the effect of programs such as Head Start. There is evidence, for example, that Head Start does improve IQ test scores in addition to children s later success in life. One point is relevant to the discussion in this chapter. Herrnstein and Murray argue that there are basic, inherited differences in intelligence between races. We reject that argument on the grounds that the vast majority of anthropologists and sociologists do not accept the idea of separate races as distinct biological entities. If there are no scientifically valid racial differences, the basic argument of The Bell Curve falls apart. In response to the long controversy, the American Anthropological Association (AAA) in 1994 issued an official Statement on Race and Intelligence. (Note in this statement and the one cited in Box 1.1 that the AAA places the word race in quotation marks as a way of indicating that the concept does not have any scientific validity.) The AAA makes the following statement: The American Anthropological Association (AAA) is deeply concerned by recent public discussions which imply that intelligence is biologically determined by race. Repeatedly challenged by scientists, nevertheless these ideas continue to be advanced. Such discussions distract public and scholarly attention from and diminish support for the collective challenge to ensure equal opportunities for all people, regardless of ethnicity or phenotypic variation. Earlier AAA resolutions against racism (1961, 1969, 1971, 1972) have spoken to this concern. The AAA further resolves: WHEREAS all human beings are members of one species, Homo sapiens, and (Continued)
15 12 CHAPTER 1 WHEREAS, differentiating species into biologically defined races has proven meaningless and unscientific as a way of explaining variation (whether in intelligence or other traits), THEREFORE, the American Anthropological Association urges the academy, our political leaders and our communities to affirm, without distraction by mistaken claims of racially determined intelligence, the common stake in assuring equal opportunity, in respecting diversity and in securing a harmonious quality of life for all people. The full AAA statement is available on the organization s website (http://www.aaanet.org). B o x 1.1 American Anthropological Association, Statement on Race, 1998 (excerpt) In the United States both scholars and the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. Evidence from the analysis of genetics (for example, DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so called racial groups. Conventional geographic racial groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within racial groups than between them. In neighboring populations there is much overlapping of genes and their phenotypic (physical) expressions. Throughout history whenever different groups have come into contact, they have interbred. The continued sharing of genetic materials has maintained all of humankind as a single species. SOURCE: The full statement, along with other materials, can be found on the website of the American Anthropological Association (http://www.aaanet.org). African American adults, asking them which term they preferred. About half (51 percent) preferred black and 43 percent preferred African American. 41 Reports by the Pew Hispanic Center find complex patterns of self-identification among Hispanics. When asked what is the first term they use to identify themselves, slightly more than half use their country of origin (i.e., Mexico, Nicaragua). About one third (34 percent) prefer Hispanic and 13 percent prefer Latino. As these examples suggest, the complex multicultural reality of American society means that the categories used by government agencies such as the Census Bureau are, as one person put it, illogical. 42 The U.S. Census Bureau classifies people on the basis of selfidentification that is, your racial or ethnic identity is what you say it is. Many people have protested the requirement of having to choose one or another racial category. The Association of MultiEthnic Americans (AMEA) was established to fight for the right of people with mixed heritage to acknowledge their full
16 RACE, ETHNICITY, AND CRIME 13 identity. AMEA proclaimed victory in October 1997 when the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) adopted new federal guidelines allowing people to identify themselves in terms of more than just one race. 43 Most of the data in this book use the racial categories established by the OMB, which are required for use by all federal agencies, including the Census Bureau. The OMB also revised the names used for many of the racial groups. The new categories are (1) American Indian or Alaska Native; (2) Asian; (3) Black or African American; (4) Hispanic or Latino; (5) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; and (6) white. Previously, OMB used only the term black; the new category is Black or African American. Persons may also identify themselves as Haitian or Negro. Previously, only the term Hispanic was used. The new guidelines use Hispanic or Latino. The OMB considered, but rejected, a proposal to use Native American and retained the old term American Indian. The OMB defines a black or African American person as anyone having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. It defines a white person as anyone having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa. Accordingly, a person who is from Morocco or Iran is classified as white, and someone from Nigeria or Tanzania is classified as black. The category of American Indians includes Alaska Natives and original peoples of North and South America (including Central America). Asian includes people from the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent. Pacific Islanders are no longer in the same category with Asians and are now included with Native Hawaiians in a separate category. 44 The OMB concedes that the racial and ethnic categories it created are not anthropologically or scientifically based. Instead, they represent a socialpolitical construct. Most important, OMB warns that the categories should not be interpreted as being primarily biolological or genetic in reference. 45 Ethnicity Ethnicity is not the same thing as race. Ethnicity refers to differences between groups of people based on cultural customs, such as language, religion, foodways, family patterns, and other characteristics. Among white Americans, for example, there are distinct ethnic groups based primarily on country of origin: Irish Americans, Italian Americans, Polish Americans, and so on. Yinger uses a three-part definition of ethnicity: (1) The group is perceived by others to be different with respect to such factors as language, religion, race, ancestral homeland, and other cultural elements; (2) the group perceives itself to be different with respect to these factors; and (3) members of the group participate in shared activities built around their (real or mythical) common origin and culture. 46 The Hispanic or Latino category is extremely complex. First, Hispanic is an ethnic designation, and individuals may belong to any racial category. Thus, some Hispanics identify themselves as white, others consider themselves African American, and some identify as Native Americans. In the past, criminal justice agencies, following the federal guidelines, have classified Hispanics as white but have not also collected data on ethnic identity. As a result, most criminal justice data sets do not provide good longitudinal data on Hispanics.
17 14 CHAPTER 1 Second, the Hispanic American population is extremely diverse in several respects. Hispanics are divided among native born Americans and immigrants. Some immigrants are naturalized citizens, others are in the United States as permanent residents or on visas, and some are undocumented immigrants. Hispanics also differ with regard to their country of origin, which includes Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Central America, South America, and others. All people born in Puerto Rico are automatically U.S. citizens. Although widely used, these categories are not consistent or logical. Mexico and Cuba are countries, whereas Central America and South America are regions consisting of several nations. Mexican Americans are the largest single group within the Hispanic community, making up 58.4 percent of the total in the 2000 census. Puerto Ricans are the second largest (9.6 percent), and Cubans are third (3.2 percent). 47 (In another curious variation, some demographic studies classify as Hispanic or Latino people whose origins involve 20 Spanish-speaking countries. This excludes Portugal and Brazil, where Portuguese rather than Spanish is spoken. The U.S. census, however, is not affected by this because it relies on selfreported identity; if you are of Brazilian heritage and you say you are Hispanic, you are Hispanic.) 48 Arab Americans Arab Americans represent a special case because the community is extremely diverse and does not fit into any of the categories used by the U.S. census. The census records most Arab Americans as Caucasian, but that label does not adequately describe the diverse community. With respect to the physical indicators that are popularly used to define race, such as skin color or hair texture, Arab Americans are as diverse as are white and black Americans. The term Arab Americans is, in fact, a social construct that includes people of many different national origins, religions, and ethnicities. 49 Many people assume that Arab Americans are religiously all Muslim, but this is not true. Arab Americans are Muslim, Christian, Druze, and other religions. Even Christian Arabs are divided among Protestant, Catholic, and Greek Orthodox. In terms of national origins, Arab Americans trace their heritage to Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Morocco, Algeria, and many other countries. (Many people assume that Turkish people are Arabs. In fact, Turkish is a national identity, referring to people who are citizens of Turkey, and they consist of several different ethnic identities.) Because of this, most Arabs are classified as white or Caucasian by the U.S. census. Finally, with regard to ethnicity, Arab Americans may be Kurds, Berbers, Armenian, Bedu, or members of other groups. We do not know exactly how many Muslims there are in the United States because the census does not collect data on religious affiliation. (There are private surveys and estimates, however.) Estimates of the total number range from 1.3 million (the American Religious Identification Survey) to 7 million (the Council on American-Islamic Relations). About 25 percent of all Muslims in the United States are converts, most of whom are African Americans. Malcolm X is probably the most famous person to have fallen in this category. Religious services are sometimes given in several languages: Urdu, Arabic, or English.
18 RACE, ETHNICITY, AND CRIME 15 Minority Groups as a Label The term minorities is widely used as a label for people of color. The United Nations defines minority groups as those nondominant groups in a population which possess and wish to preserve stable ethnic, religious or linguistic traditions or characteristics markedly different from those of the rest of the population. The noted sociologist Louis Wirth adds the element of discrimination to this definition: minorities are those who are singled out from the others in the society in which they live for differential and unequal treatment, and who therefore regard themselves as objects of collective discrimination. 50 Use of the term minority is increasingly criticized. Among other things, it has a pejorative connotation, suggesting less than something else, which in this context means less than some other groups. The new OMB guidelines for the Census Bureau and other federal agencies specifically do not identify or designate certain population groups as minority groups. 51 Many people today prefer to use the term people of color. Some American cities are now majority African American or Latino. The Miami-Dade County metropolitan area in 2009, for example, was 62.5 percent Hispanic, 20 percent African American, and 18 percent white non-hispanic. Los Angeles in 2009 was almost 50 percent Hispanic. As a result, in a number of cities more than half of the police officers are African Americans or Latino, non-hispanic white being a minority. In these situations, which group is the majority and which is the minority? From a national perspective, you get one answer. A local perspective gives you a different one. Diversity within Racial and Ethnic Groups Another important complicating factor is the diversity that exists within racial and ethnic groups. As our previous discussion indicates, both the Latino and the Arab American communities include people of very different national origins. The African American community, meanwhile, consists of people whose families have been in the United States for hundreds of years and recent immigrants from Africa. Some recent immigrants from Africa, for example, do not wish to be labeled African Americans because they consider themselves strictly African. The Hispanic community is extremely diverse. It includes native born Americans and immigrants. Among the native born, some families have been in the United States for many generations, whereas others are first-generation Americans. Immigrants include both legal and unauthorized or undocumented persons. Some immigrants speak English fluently, others speak only their native language, and many are bilingual. The Native American community is divided among 562 tribal governments recognized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (which does not necessarily include all tribes), some of which have very different languages, cultural traditions, and tribal political institutions. The Cherokee tribe is the largest, with 302,569 members according to the 2000 census. The second largest is the Navajo tribe, with 276,775 members. One third (34 percent) of Native Americans live on reservations or designated areas. 52 Each racial and ethnic group, meanwhile, is divided by social class, with both wealthy and poor members. Social class has a major impact on peoples experiences with the criminal justice system.
19 16 CHAPTER 1 The census category of Asian, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islanders includes many diverse groups. For example, Asian Americans include many people of Chinese or Japanese origin whose families have been in the United States for generations, and also many very recent immigrants. The economic status of these different groups is often very different. Many Native Hawaiians, meanwhile, are also well established economically, socially, and politically. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) data on crime victimization, however, collapse these very different people into a single category. The National Council on Crime and Delinquency, however, argues that it is important, where possible, to disaggregate the Asian American population into its different components because some may have greater involvement with the justice system than the group as a whole. 53 Diversity has many impacts. A Vera Institute of Justice study of police relations with immigrant communities in New York City concluded that immigrant groups are not monolithic, [but] are made up of ethnically, culturally, socio-economically, and often linguistically diverse subgroups. This has important implications for criminal justice agencies. The Vera Institute report advised that police departments must reach out to a variety of community representatives, even within one racial or ethnic group. 54 One reason criminal justice agencies need to reach out to immigrant groups is that recent arrivals to the United States do not necessarily understand our legal system. A number of scholars have noted that they do not share the legal consciousness that long-time American residents have. 55 This legal consciousness includes a sense of inherent rights and entitlements regarding the legal system. In practice, this includes a sense of your right to call the police if you have a problem, a right to be treated respectfully by the police and other officials, and a right to file a complaint if you are not treated properly. The Politics of Racial and Ethnic Labels There has always been great controversy over what term should be used to designate different racial and ethnic groups. The term African American, for example, is relatively new and became widely used only in the 1980s. It has begun to replace black as the preferred designation, which replaced Negro in the 1960s. Negro, in turn, replaced colored about 25 years earlier. The leading African American civil rights organization is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), founded in Ironically, colored replaced African much earlier. In some respects, then, we have come full circle in the past 150 years. As John Hope Franklin, the distinguished African American historian and former chair of President Clinton s Initiative on Race, points out in his classic history of African Americans, From Slavery to Freedom, the subjects of his book have been referred to by three distinct names even during the lifetime of this book. 56 What label do African Americans prefer? A 2007 Gallup Poll found that 24 percent prefer African American, 13 percent prefer black, and 61 percent say it does not matter. 57 The controversy over the proper label is political in the sense that it often involves a power struggle between different racial and ethnic groups. It is not
20 RACE, ETHNICITY, AND CRIME 17 just a matter of which label but who chooses that label. Wolf argues that the function of racial categories within industrial capitalism is exclusionary. 58 The power to control one s own label represents an important element of police power and autonomy. Having to accept a label placed on you by another group is an indication of powerlessness. The term black emerged as the preferred designation in the late 1960s as part of an assertion of pride in blackness and quest for power by African Americans themselves. The African American community was making a political statement to the majority white community: This is how we choose to describe ourselves. In a similar fashion, the term African American emerged in the 1980s through a process of self-designation on the part of the African American community. In this book, we use the term African American. It emerged as the preferred term by spokespeople for the African American community and was adopted by the OMB for the 2000 census and continued for 2010 (and can be used along with black, Negro, and Haitian). It is also consistent with terms commonly used for other groups. We routinely refer to Irish Americans, Polish Americans, and Chinese Americans, for instance, using the country of origin as the primary descriptor. It makes sense, therefore, to designate people whose place of origin is Africa as African Americans. The term black refers to a color, which is an imprecise descriptor for a group of people whose members range in skin color from a very light yellow to a very dark black. A similar controversy exists over the proper term for Hispanic Americans (see Box 1.2). Not everyone, including some leaders of the community itself, prefers this term. Some prefer Latino, and others use Chicano. As we previously noted, a majority of Hispanics refer to themselves by their country of origin, but about one third use the term Hispanic and the remainder prefer Latino. 59 A 2005 B o x 1.2 Donde está la justicia? The term Hispanic has been used to refer to people of Spanish descent. The term refers, in part, to people with ties to nations where Spanish is the official language. The U.S. government and legal system historically have insisted on categorizing all Spanish-speaking people as Hispanic and treating them as a monolithic group, regardless of cultural differences. The term Latino, however, generally refers to people with ties to the nations of Latin America and the Caribbean, including some nations where Spanish is not spoken such as Brazil. It also encompasses people born in the United States whose families immigrated to this country from Latin America in the recent past and those whose ancestors immigrated generations ago. Like the term Hispanic, the categorization Latino is a general one that does not recognize the diversity of ethnic subgroups (for example, Puerto Rican, Dominican, Guatemalan, Peruvian, and Mexican). SOURCE: Adapted from Francisco A. Villarruel and Nancy E. Walker, Donde está la justicia? A Call to Action on Behalf of Latino and Latina Youth in the U.S. Justice System (East Lansing, MI: Institute for Youth, Children, and Families, 2002).