The incarceration of criminals is ubiquitously associated with the promotion of safety, however, for people of color, this process is prejudiced and deeply flawed, contrarily often putting them in harm’s way. For some, mass incarceration is a distant concept that rarely touches their loved ones and has no effect on their community. For others, it is an ominous figure that looms over them their entire lives, slowly absorbing their peers and eventually sucking them in.

Mass incarceration is defined as the surge in incarcerated people in the United States, mostly black men on misdemeanor drug charges. This practice of punishing “criminals” for excessive amounts of time has been veiled as “protection” of the American people, however, this is very far from the truth as it perpetuates structural violence (systemic discrimination) and racism. “Inequalities in power, access, opportunities, treatment, and policy impacts and outcomes, whether they are intentional or not” (Lawrence 1) are all indications that structural violence is present in a particular community. The public school system (the school-to-prison pipeline), imposition of excessive bail, lack of government rehabilitative services for drug addicts, stop-and-frisk and the unforgiving attitude the government has for ex-convicts, are all systemic forms of discrimination that inherently persecute people of color. Mass incarceration in the United States manifests itself as the institutional preference of white people, at the expense of people of color.

The public school system integrates security and disciplinary rules that lead children on a path towards the prison system, targeting a subset of children; black, latino, immigrant and mentally disabled children. The school-to-prison pipeline describes the disciplinary and school safety practices that force children from the classroom and into the criminal justice system. Youth of color, LGBTQ, students with disabilities are punished more often and more harshly than their peers for their behavior. They are stigmatized within the school system from kindergarten in which some children who misbehave because of their “inability” to learn, are put into special education which hinders their ability to learn at the same rate as their classmates. There is a huge disparity in the suspension rates by race; white students have a five percent chance of getting suspension, black students have a sixteen percent chance and black students with disabilities have a 25 percent chance. Not only does the system put “troublesome” students in different programs but students from disadvantaged neighborhoods are assumed to be dangerous and have to endure intensive security measures in their school environment.

Disadvantaged communities experience excessive budget cuts that remove counselors, social workers and other mental health resources that children need to support them, especially in dangerous areas where gang activity is prominent, disportionately harming them by reducing funding. Those who are unsatisfied with their home life or their social life need counseling and if they are unable to find the support within their school, they seek out another source of consolation. Gang leaders can seem to be parental figures or mentors, in the eyes of the vulnerable teens, and with that kind of influence in their life, encourage them to commit crime. This shows that crime can come from places of desperation or dissatisfaction, whether it be conscious or unconscious; it can send both an ex-convict and a minor to prison.

In hopes of discouraging students from having any outbursts or displaying indecorous behavior, the public school system implemented the flawed zero tolerance policy, equating trivial misbehaviors with serious offenses. This policy also reduces students to their infraction, allowing authority figures to overlook their possible disability and home environment. For example, a student that is trying to provide for their family that works nights and comes to school aggravated because of their exhaustion, talks back to the teacher. This offense could receive the same swift punishment as a student bringing a weapon to school with the intention of hurting another student. Statistics found by the New York Civil Liberties Union showed that harsh disciplinary measures such as suspension (in-school or out of school), expulsions and arrests can hinder a student’s potential for higher education, cause stigmatization, isolation (which leads to mental issues and increased likelihood of violence) and undermine a student’s right to an education. In fact, students who receive one out-of-school suspension in the ninth grade are two times less likely to graduate. Students who severely misbehave are restrained by the SROs in front of their peers which can often make them agitated. These flashpoints of confrontation can escalate very quickly and lead to arrests, sending the student to juvenile detention centers for “assault”. These interactions between SROs and students create hostile environments and push students, who need support from educators, out of the system that is supposed to give them the best chance of succeeding. The system fails to look at students as individuals who are impressionable and if given the right support, they can see themselves succeeding and moving onto higher education, leaving the environment they were born into. Instead, it expects disadvantaged students of color to be troublesome, conditioning them to believe that that is the truth, sending them on a path of crime and then, essentially punishing them for it.

The bail system currently "strips our justice system of its credibility”, said Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman, of New York. When disadvantaged youth get into trouble with the law, either at school or on the streets, the bail system hinders their chance of returning home to await try-out so they are forced to stay in prison for months at a time. Not only are they unable to post bail but due to their financial circumstances, they are unable to pay for a good-quality lawyer to fight their case so they are stuck with overworked public defenders. If they cannot afford it, they can turn to a bail bondsmen, however they charge 10-15% fee for the loan and may require collateral such as; deeds on homes, cars, etc. So if someone is unable to post bail on their own, not only are they forced to either stay in jail or seek other methods of payment, but they also have to pay more than the original quantity, if they want to go home. Bails set at high costs are essentially coercing people into taking plea bargains because it plays on the fact that people want to avoid prolonged periods in prison if possible. This takes advantage of the human inclination to avoid punishment just to hold someone accountable for the crime, regardless of their innocence or guilt.

Kalief Browder was sixteen years old when he was arrested for allegedly stealing a backpack. Due to his inability to post bail, he was stuck on Riker’s island for three years awaiting trial where he experienced two years in solitary confinement, traumatic abuse from the guards and unwanted sexual encounters with fellow inmates. He eventually committed suicide because those atrocities caused unimaginable suffering. While this devastating case highlights the flawed prison system as a whole, it shows how the bail system is unrelenting in the way it functions. Although the eighth amendment prohibits the imposition of excessive bail, the United States continues to allow judges to set bail higher than people can possibly afford. Browder’s mother was unable to pay the $3,000 bail and while he could’ve pleaded guilty to be released the same day, he refused to admit to something he did not do.“You’re not going to make me say I did something just so I can go home. The way I looked at it if I got to stay here just to prove that I am innocent, then so be it." Browder said, showing how the product of a plea deal could come solely from desperation and economic disadvantage.

Although the bail system is always imposed when a suspect is released from jail (pre-trial), judges make determinations of flight risk based on history of crime, nature of the offense-at-hand, length of possible sentence, community ties and defendant’s character, at the bail hearing. This puts the judge in the position to use their own (often) biased reasoning to decide how much money a suspect owes the court or if they are given the right to leave jail while the case is pending. The consideration of one’s familial and alleged community ties allows judges to make assumptions based on neighborhood and socioeconomic status. The bail system inherently discriminates against the poor because financial status and background determines freedom. So not only does the bail system favor the rich, but it also hasn’t been proven to be the best way to guarantee someone’s return to court. It commonly shows prejudice against people of color because judges are quicker to assume that they are affiliated with gangs and organized crime when they come from disadvantaged communities. Until the bail system is replaced by a non-cash method, the judicial system will remain flawed because it threatens public safety when wealthy high-risk criminals can be released and perpetuates economic discrimination when low-risk criminals or suspects cannot afford to post bail.

Drug laws, that are currently being implemented in the United States, are not only discriminating against socioeconomically disadvantaged communities but also incarcerating people for prolonged periods, which is solely punitive and not rehabilitative. The judicial system  discriminates by creating harsher punishments for drugs predominantly used by African-Americans in low-income neighborhoods. This is demonstrated in the Anti-Drug Abuse act of 1986 where there was large disparity between the minimum amount needed to incarcerate someone for five years for crack and for powder cocaine. For five hundred grams of powder cocaine, you were likely to get at least 5 years plus probation which is the same if you were in possession of five grams of crack. This systemic discrimination against black people allows more black people to be arrested for lengthier times than white people, when they are committing drug crimes at the same rate.

The war on drugs might’ve started as a concept made to reduce the amount of dangerous drug usage but has manifested into a reason law enforcers use to abuse people’s basic human rights, especially with the stop-and-frisk policy. Stop-and-frisk is a tactic police officers use to search for contraband on any given person on the street, with “reasonable” suspicion. The premise is that if you stop a “criminal”, pat them down, find contraband and arrest them, you are preventing them from committing a crime, later-on. However, this has allowed police officers to use their implicit or explicit biases to racially profile innocent people in the street and violate their personal space. The New York Civil Liberties Union conducted a study on the effectiveness of stop-and-frisk and found that out of the 45,787 stops filed by the police, 82 percent were innocent and 53 percent were black. Black people are unequally targeted for stop-and-frisks and have to endure violations of their personal space because of the “suspiciousness” of their appearance. Not only is this whole concept’s constitutionality  questionable, but it also allows police officers to perpetuate the same racism that plagues the judicial system as a whole.

Ex-convicts continue to be punished for their actions after they leave prison as they are constantly discriminated against for their past.In 1996, the congress passed an oppressive policy that banned them for life from government assistance, with the exception of those in states that expressly opted-out of the ban. They are denied access to government welfare such as Supplemental Nutritional Assistance (food stamps) and Public Housing. Although “Ban the Box” was recently implemented, ex-convicts would have to disclose their criminal record on job applications which would immediately put them at a disadvantage over other applicants because of stigmatization. Ex-convicts received less than half of the callbacks of equally qualified applicants without criminals records. This makes it incredibly difficult for them to regain economic stability, increasing their chances of succumbing to a life of crime.

This process leaves minor drug criminals in vulnerable positions as ex-convicts to commit crime therefore, the rate of recidivism is unbelievably high. The Bureau of Justice Statistics studies found that out of the 404,638 prisoners in 30 states that they tracked, 76.6 percent were rearrested within five years of release. This is attributed to the fact that the system is solely punitive rather than rehabilitative and that ex-convicts are deprived of government help when they’ve lacked substantial income during their time in prison and need it most. Perhaps their incentive to commit crime comes from a place of desperation and habit and if ex-convicts were given the resources to properly re-enter society, the recidivism problem would disappear. Although some people are born into harsh environments where committing crime is survival, if given the opportunity to be in a safe neighborhood with a non-criminal steady job, most, if not all, would take it. Many of these ex-convicts have families that they need to provide for and if they are unable to get a job, they have to find other ways to put food on the table. They are risking the livelihood of their children if they cannot work. Parental instinct is to protect one’s child, by all means necessary.

A common argument that opposes the idea that mass incarceration targets a certain demographic and is a form of structural violence, is that those who commit the crimes are fully aware of the repercussions; jail time. Our society makes it clear that with actions that harm other members of the community or the community itself, comes punishment. Regardless of race, people make conscious decisions to commit those crimes and they deserve to spend time to rethink their actions. Their influence on others, if they remained in normalcy, would be dangerous and risky, therefore incarcerating them is the only solution. There is also the argument that many people come to this conclusion by examining mass incarceration on a case-by-case basis, however, that doesn’t demonstrate the entire system at work, rather just one or a few instances of discrimination within it. Some attribute the spike in incarceration to “a greater willingness among prosecutors to bring felony charges for any given arrest” (Fordham Law School professor John Pfaff) and to corporate greed rather than racial motivations. Furthermore, the privatization of prisons has incentivized the mass incarceration of individuals as corporations can profit from the law being enforced with an iron fist and judges can be cut a check. These arguments are generally unsubstantiated while statistics prove otherwise. Although in some ways, these all play into mass incarceration as a whole, to deny the harmful role of racial biases in the justice system is ignorant when there are statistics that show that white and black people commit crimes at the same rate and more black people are incarcerated for them.

As a society, we are obsessed with the idea that retributive justice is the only way productive way to have a criminal be in isolation and punish them for their actions. However, new studies have shown that that it is actually counterproductive and chances of recidivism are high, due to the lifelong punishment, in one form or another, that convicts must endure. These racial disparities within the justice system are hindering its ability to protect and serve the US citizens, however, there are great strides being made towards reform and repairing the broken system. For example, some public schools are now implementing mentorship programs for troubled youth where they can have a stable and positive influential figure guide them through high school and keep them out of trouble. Although this does not replace trained professionals meant to look after the emotional health of the students, it allows the students to have true bonds with adults who care about their futures and welfares, who aren’t forced to do so out of obligation or financial need. Studies are being conducted within poorly funded public schools to see what relevant issues the students would like to study to keep them passionate and interested, even if it is only for one class out of the many. This will motivate them to come to school every day in anticipation of learning something “voluntarily” and perhaps lead them to becoming more curious and engaged students.

Now government officials are starting to encourage and push reform; Mayor De Blasio has started “The Bail Lab” which is a project that tests out alternatives to cash bail that can possibly be implemented into the NYC justice system. This will allow low-risk criminals to show their commitment to making the trial, rather than spending weeks in jail because they are unable to make bail. While they have identified many of the aforementioned issues with the system, they also discovered that most of these low-risk criminals attend their court dates when there is little to no monetary payment involved or when organizations post their bail on their behalf. This project also strives to provide judges with better data for them to be more informed on their decisions of flight risk. With the backing of the mayor, I anticipate that this project will lead to bail reform in the near future, in New York City. While, to reform the issue of racial disparities in drug sentencing, President Barack Obama has passed the “Fair Sentencing Act” where the mandatory sentence for first-time crack cocaine possession of five grams was eliminated, increasing the amount of a substance with a cocaine base that would result in a mandatory prison sentence and increasing the monetary fines for drug trafficking. In fact, effective November 1st 2011, the act was applied retroactively and reduced the sentences of incarceration individuals on crack-cocaine possession charges. While there are many holes in this act that keep it from being completely effective in removing racial disparities, it has a strong impact.

While “Stop-and-Frisk” continues to have an ominous presence in disadvantaged communities, it has slowly become less prevalent, each year.  For example, in 2011, 685,724 ‘stop-and-frisk’s were performed in New York City while 2015 is predicted to have about 27,208 based on the first two quarters. While this number is still not reflective of what the ideal situation would be, it shows that positive change is happening within the police system. For convicts who have been released from prison, including those who have been racially discriminated against by the justice system, there are organizations that are providing services to convicts to help them re-enter society. The Second Chance Reentry Program, created in 2008, provides money to states, local governments and nonprofit organizations to aid safe reintegration, to mentor ex-offenders, offer transitional support, to offer drug treatment for incarcerated convicts and help the general welfare of the ex-cons (housing, food, etc). This is just one example of the aid available to ex-offenders and hopefully, the government will remove the ban or more organizations will help make programs like these widespread.

While the future shows potential for the system to be repaired, the issue that mass incarceration inherently discriminates against black people has to be recognized by lawmakers, in order for them to combat the issue with more dedication. It is not only the process of arresting a criminal and putting them in jail that can demonstrate structural racism but also, the way the public school system functions targets minority youth, making them vulnerable to misbehaving, committing crimes and being arrested. In my personal opinion, change has to start from the bottom-up. The public school system needs to be reformed, making it an environment that fosters the learning of each individual and safety. More funding needs to go into repairing the flawed system that theoretically “raises” the criminals. If teenagers are given more opportunities to succeed, there will be less of a mind-set that crime is even a plausible means of survival. The underfunded school system in disadvantaged communities push black youth to enter into a life of crime where they will be punished for the rest of their life for it, whether it be in jail or in society after their release. This system that was created for justice continues to preserve those historical racial inequalities, demonstrated before and during Jim Crow, which actually causes injustice. Structural violence against black people is present in the United States and the judicial system will still perpetuate it every day if it continues to function without the necessary change. Once race stop becoming a determinant in the course of one’s future, the justice system will be more effective.