All content categorized with: Criminal Legal System
Filter
Post List
Overdue Expungement Legislation Signals Michigan’s Commitment to Criminal Reform and Recognition of Racial Inequality
By Meghan Patero Associate Editor, Vol. 26 2020 has drawn attention to the glaring consequences of racial inequality within the criminal justice system.[i] And while efforts to enact policies aimed at decreasing the number of people who enter the criminal justice system are important, we must also not forget…Jail By Another Name: ICE Detention of Immigrant Criminal Defendants on Pretrial Release
This Article assesses the legality of an alarming practice: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) routinely detains noncitizen criminal defendants soon after they have been released on bail, depriving them of their court-ordered freedom. Since the District of Oregon’s decision in United States v. Trujillo-Alvarez, 900 F. Supp. 2d 1167 (D. Or. 2012), a growing group of federal courts has held that when ICE detains federal criminal defendants released under the Bail Reform Act (BRA), it violates their BRA rights. These courts have ordered that the government either free the defendants from ICE custody or dismiss their criminal charges. This Article agrees with and expands on this interpretation of the BRA. Focusing on the BRA’s plain text and legislative history, it argues that the BRA confers a “right to remain released” pending trial, which ICE detention infringes. It then debunks the leading counterarguments to this BRA interpretation. It also explores constitutional arguments for the right to remain released and their implications for federal and state criminal defendants.What’s Safety Got To Do With It? Why We Shouldn’t Be Shackling Youths (or Anyone) in Michigan
By Melissa Almonte Associate Editor, Vol. 25 During my first seminar with the Juvenile Justice Clinic at the University of Michigan Law School, I learned that children are routinely shackled in juvenile proceedings in Michigan. My jaw dropped. I thought: but that’s only supposed to happen in criminal court!…Criminal Justice Reform: Has California Done Enough?
by Amanda Stephens Associate Editor, Vol. 25 2.2 million people are incarcerated in the United States.[1] Of those millions of people, 67% of those individuals are people of color.[2] This fact is not new. Scholars and activists over the last decade have worked tirelessly to…Donald Trump: The Champion of Criminal Justice Reform?
By Tamar Alexanian Associate Editor, Vol. 25 On October 25, 2019, the 45th President of our great, fair, and just nation received the Bipartisan Justice Award at the 2019 Second Step Presidential Justice Forum, an event organized by the 20/20 Bipartisan Justice Center.[1] The Justice Center gave…Hands Up, Don’t Shoot: Keeping Police Brutality in Check
By Sophie Karpf Associate Editor, Vol. 25 As of November 2, 2019, the police have shot and killed 752 people this year.[1] While that number represents nearly 90 fewer shootings than there were at this time last year, there has not been an appreciable drop in…We Have the Technology: Reducing Deaths by Cops and Crashes
By Chris Hemry Executive Editor, Vol. 24. The police have a lot of power over civilians. This is especially palpable on the roads.[1] The police can pull you over for a “broken taillight,” order everyone out of the car, frisk everyone, arrest the driver for the broken taillight, impound the car, and then search every container inside.[2] Of course, where there is power, there are abuses of power, and discretion is often abused along racial lines. Police pull over more non-white drivers for minor infractions.[3] They also search non-white drivers more often and issue them more tickets.[4] Police kill Black motorists at much higher rates, and use non-lethal force against them more than twice as often.[5] At the same time, “[p]eople who are police, are related to the police, hold positions of power and authority, or who frequently work with or come in friendly contact with the police are largely immune from traffic enforcement.”[6] So what can we do about it? One solution would be to simply stop enforcing traffic laws. This option seems pretty attractive, given everything above.[7] For places with smaller populations, it may even be feasible. Several European cities have experimented with the idea of eliminating traffic controls with surprising success.[8] Nonetheless, traffic safety is a serious concern; every year, there are over five million crashes, resulting in over thirty thousand deaths.[9] Studies consistently show that reduced enforcement results in more crashes.[10] Conversely, “highly visible, sustained, and widespread” enforcement has been shown to be the most effective.[11]Chilling Effect: Brooklyn Detainees Bang on Prison Walls as Temperatures Drop
By Elizabeth Morales Associate Editor, Vol, 24 On the first day of February, as temperatures in East Coast dropped below-freezing, a video showing inmates banging on the walls and windows of their cells at a Brooklyn jail went viral. The inmates were trying to alert people on the outside that their building had been with little to no heat for six days. Their call for help was successful, and a sea of protestors quickly formed on the streets below. More videos of activists chanting “turn on the heat!” made the social media rounds bringing worldwide attention to the conditions inside the jail. The jail in question is the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC Brooklyn). MDC Brooklyn is a pre-trial detention facility in Brooklyn, NY that houses more than 1,600 inmates at all security levels.[1] most of whom are awaiting trial or are there due to their inability to make bail.[2] Problems with the building’s heating system started on January 27th when an electrical fire broke out in the jail’s west building which houses only men.[3] The fire caused a partial power outage [4] and engaged the jail’s emergency power system.[5] There is dispute as to whether heat and hot water in the jail’s housing units was affected.[6] The jail’s warden, Herman Quay, responded to the public outcry stating via a spokeswoman that “[c]ells have heat and hot water, there is lighting in the common areas and inmates are receiving hot meals.”[7] Local public defenders and union leaders paint a different story.[8] They report receiving dozens of calls from inmates via a dedicated line inside the jail that directly connects the inmates with the federal defenders offices.[9] Inmates allegedly complained of frigid temperatures, ill health, pitch-black cells, and lack of access to essentials like extra blankets and additional sweaters.[10]Juries So White: Why the All-White Jury is Still so Prevalent in Michigan
By Christopher Hemry Executive Editor, Vol. 24 Michigan courts are insidiously tedious in the way they secure all-white juries.[1]For serious cases, more than 60 potential jurors are brought to the court, and then 14 are randomly selected to sit in the jury box.[2] From there, they are subjected, one by one, to a litany of questions about their jobs, their families, and their attitudes about crime and law enforcement.[3] By the third juror, the questioning is monotonous almost to the point of becoming white noise. It’s little wonder, then, that when the juror of color with a slight accent is offered an opportunity to leave — by the judge, no less — they jump at the chance. One Michigan judge is so adept at detecting jurors who “may have trouble understanding trial proceedings,” that he knows as soon as they open their mouths. Despite their previous sworn statement that they understand English[4] he has them identified and excused for cause within 3 sentences.[5] Other disparities sneak in as the questions drone on for 30-40 more jurors. The black juror isn’t asked for clarification when he says that jury duty would be a burden.[6] The white juror has to define his financial situation and swear that he wouldn’t be able to make rent.[7] The white juror with an uncle and brother-in-law in law enforcement who said that she’s inclined to believe police over civilians is deemed impartial after she’s pressed into saying she thinks she could set aside her personal feelings and view the evidence fairly. But the black juror whose cousin six states away had a bad experience with police is dismissed for cause. The end result is often an all-white jury.The First Step Act: It Needs to be the First Step
By Jules Hayer Associate Editor, Vol. 24 On December 21, 2018 the President signed into law the First Step Act. The First Step Act is a criminal justice reform bill that decreases mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenses, modifies the three strikes rule from requiring a life sentence to mandating a 25-year sentence, and gives judges more discretion when sentencing people convicted of nonviolent drug offenses. The Act also makes retroactive a 2010 law that reduced the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine offenses, and also includes provisions that improve prison conditions.[1] These tangible changes demonstrate that parts of the First Step Act are a push in the right direction for criminal justice reform. After all, this year the collective changes outlined in the Act are expected to reduce the sentences of more than 9,000 people currently serving time. Yet critics of the Act point out that this impact is nominal. Not only will this Act impact less than 5% of the federal prison population, which now exceeds 180,000,[2] the Act will also only impact those serving time in federal prisons, when in fact more than 88% of the nation’s prison population is serving time in the state system.[3] And rather than demonstrating laudable progress, some parts of the Act demonstrate just how fundamentally flawed the policies that were previously in place were. For example, the Act prohibits the shackling of women during childbirth and prior to the completion of postpartum recovery, mandates that the Bureau of Prisons make tampons and sanitary napkins available to women in prison for free, and requires that efforts are made to place individuals within 500 driving miles of their primary residence.[4] While all of these changes demonstrate a degree of progress, they also bring to light how damaging many of the Bureau of Prisons policies have been in the past.