UCLA criminal justice law review最新文献_第3页

Investigating Algorithmic Risk and Race 调查算法风险和种族

UCLA criminal justice law review Pub Date : 2021-09-21 DOI: 10.5070/cj85154807

Melissa Hamilton

{"title":"Investigating Algorithmic Risk and Race","authors":"Melissa Hamilton","doi":"10.5070/cj85154807","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5070/cj85154807","url":null,"abstract":"Author(s): Hamilton, Melissa | Abstract: Risk assessment algorithms lie at the heart of criminal justice reform to tackle mass incarceration. The newest application of risk tools centers on the pretrial stage as a means to reduce both reliance upon wealth-based bail systems and rates of pretrial detention. Yet the ability of risk assessment to achieve the reform movement’s goals will be challengedif the risk tools do not perform equitably for minorities. To date, little is known about the racial fairness of these algorithms as they are used in the field. This Article offers an original empirical study of a popular risk assessment tool to evaluate its race-based performance. The case study is novel in employing a two-sample design with large datasets from diverse jurisdictions, one with a supermajority white population and the other a supermajority Black population.Statistical analyses examine whether, in these jurisdictions, the algorithmic risk tool results in disparate impact, exhibits test bias, or displays differential validity in terms of unequal performance metrics for white versus Black defendants. Implications of the study results are informative to the broader knowledge base about risk assessment practices in the field. Results contribute to the debate about the topic of algorithmic fairness in an important setting where one’s liberty interests may be infringed despite not being adjudicated guilty of any crime.","PeriodicalId":91042,"journal":{"name":"UCLA criminal justice law review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43260632","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Mandatory Arbitration and Prison Services Contracts: How Private Companies Exploit the Incarcerated and Consumers to Reject Meaningful Accountability 强制性仲裁和监狱服务合同:私营公司如何利用被监禁者和消费者拒绝有意义的责任

UCLA criminal justice law review Pub Date : 2021-09-21 DOI: 10.5070/cj85154812

Grace Bennett

{"title":"Mandatory Arbitration and Prison Services Contracts: How Private Companies Exploit the Incarcerated and Consumers to Reject Meaningful Accountability","authors":"Grace Bennett","doi":"10.5070/cj85154812","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5070/cj85154812","url":null,"abstract":"Author(s): Bennett, Grace | Abstract: This Comment considers a previously unexamined, and particularly vile, consequence of the movement towards consumer arbitration clauses: their impact on incarcerated people and their families. Incarceration is physically, emotionally, and financially ruinous for both the incarcerated and for families who are routinely forced to subsidize their loved one’s incarceration through paying for things like phone calls and basic needs that prisons fail to meet. The burden on families has only increased as governments have contracted various aspects of correctional systems out to private companies that charge exorbitant prices for basic services, knowing full well that consumers have no choice but to comply if they want to provide for and stay connected to incarcerated loved ones. This system would be inhumane enough without the added element of forced arbitration. This Comment hopes to shine a light on how mandatory arbitration clauses make an already exploitative situation all the worse. Not only are families of the incarcerated charged outrageous and illegal prices to communicate with and protect their loved ones, but mandatory arbitration ensures that they have no real ability to hold responsible companies accountable.","PeriodicalId":91042,"journal":{"name":"UCLA criminal justice law review","volume":"51 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41293917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Some Modest Proposals for a Progressive Prosecutor 对进步检察官的几点建议

UCLA criminal justice law review Pub Date : 2020-10-06 DOI: 10.5070/cj85154805

Steven Zeidman

引用次数: 0

CARCERAL IMMOBILITY AND FINANCIAL CAPTURE: A Framework for the Consequences of Racial Capitalism Penology and Monetary Sanctions. 种族资本主义的刑罚和货币制裁的后果框架。

UCLA criminal justice law review Pub Date : 2020-01-01

Brittany Friedman