The Corner

The Underpolicing Crisis

When libertarians call for criminal justice reform, they tend to focus on coercion, and why we should want less of it. Left-liberals look to the ways in which the criminal justice system entrenches racial inequality. While I’m sympathetic to both lines of argument, I’ve long felt that conservatives should occupy a distinctive role in the debate. Personal freedom is important. So is the fact that mass incarceration has deleterious consequences not just for the incarcerated, but for their families. But just as conservatives backed punitive policies in the past to combat rising crime, we now ought to back reforms designed to accelerate the decline in violent crime. To achieve this goal, we need to think hard about the legitimacy of our criminal justice system. 

Sophisticated proponents of criminal justice reform, like Mark Kleiman, author of When Brute Force Fails, and Stephanos Bibas, author of The Machinery of Criminal Justiceboth of whom have contributed to National Review, emphasize the importance of reforming the criminal justice system so that we get bigger reductions in crime per dollar spent, and per unit of punishment. Moreover, both Kleiman and Bibas are sensitive to the question of legitimacy: for policing to be effective, the communities being policed need to feel as though they are being treated fairly. Similarly, if we want ex-offenders to become productive members of society, we need to punish them in ways that strengthen rather than weaken their connections to their families and neighborhoods, and to the law-abiding people in their lives.

More broadly, Kleiman and Bibas remind us that we can approach crime control in ways that deplete the legitimacy of the criminal justice system or in ways that increase it. This is not to say we can only do one or the other. There are times when legitimacy-depleting tactics might be necessary to keep neighborhoods safe. For example, stop, question, and frisk might prove effective at reducing gun violence while also engendering resentment among the people who bear its brunt. Instead of abandoning it, however, we might reform it in legitimacy-enhancing ways, e.g., requiring that officers give those who’ve been stopped “receipts.” (The NYPD has started doing something along these lines, but let’s just say their approach is less than ideal.) But stop, question, and frisk is a marginal issue when compared to the far bigger issue Los Angeles Times reporter Jill Leovy addresses in her new book Ghettoside, and also in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. Leovy offers a provocative argument: controversial police tactics like stop, question, and frisk reflect “a law enforcement model in which prevention is everything and vigorous response is an afterthought.” Arrest sweeps are fundamentally less challenging than the kind of detailed, labor-intensive investigation it takes to actually solve crimes, and so a huge share of homicides in violent neighborhoods go unsolved:

From 1988 to 2002, the number of unsolved homicides in the L.A. Police Department’s South Bureau was 41 per square mile. Even as many white neighborhoods remained untouched by killings during this period, some predominately black ones had three unsolved cases per block—seven at the especially violent intersection of South San Pedro and East 84th streets.

Meanwhile, police focused, as they had in the past, on nuisance and vice – the cheap and easy, low-hanging fruit of the trade. As early as 1956, Los Angeles police arrested more than 200,000 people a year for “drunkenness” and municipal code violations – a number that is nearly a tenth of the city’s population. The “broken windows” theory of policing echoes these old paddy-wagon tactics.

The result has been a doubling down on distrust. When violent crimes go unpunished while nonviolent ones get hammered, many conclude that the state seeks control, not justice. Police don’t benefit either: Devoted cops would much rather chase serious offenders. We should let them.

I’m more sympathetic to cracking down on nuisance and vice than Leovy. Yes, arresting people for drunkenness might undermine the legitimacy of the system in the eyes of those arrested, but it also protects public order, which strengthens the system’s legitimacy for those who might otherwise fear harassment or bullying. Yet her broader point — that the failure to solve crimes in violent neighborhoods sows distrust — is a profound one. If we want to increase the legitimacy of the criminal justice system, we ought to start by doing a better job of seeing that justice is done for the families of murder victims, even when the murder victims are less than admirable people. When we talk about criminal justice reform, we ought to talk less about the plight of violent offenders and more about the murderers who get away with their crimes because police forces don’t have the resources to do their jobs, or because they’re crippled by union work rules that get in the way.

And how might we address the resource problem? One idea, from W. David Ball of Santa Clara University School of Law (see Leon Neyfakh’s article on Ball), is to take the funds that currently go to state prisons and hand them over to county governments, which would then be responsible for paying for the people they incarcerate. If they chose to, say, put nonviolent offenders away for shorter stints, they’d be in a position to shift resources to the detectives we rely on to solve crimes. Ball’s approach is radical. There is no question that state prison authorities won’t like it, and the transition willl be tough. But in its respect for local priorities, and its insistence that local officials bear the cost of their decisions, Ball’s approach is also quite conservative. 

Reihan Salam — Reihan Salam is executive editor of National Review and a National Review Institute policy fellow.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Broward’s Cowards

It is impossible to imagine circumstances under which Broward County sheriff Scott Israel could attempt to perform his duties with the confidence of the public. He should resign immediately, and if, as he promises, he refuses to go quietly, then he should be shown the door by the people he professes to ... Read More

Courage: The Greatest of Virtues

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is Jonah Goldberg’s weekly “news”letter, the G-File. Subscribe here to get the G-File delivered to your inbox on Fridays. Dear Reader (Or Listener), As the reporter assigned the job of writing the article about all of Sidney Blumenthal’s friends and supporters told his ... Read More

My American Dream

This morning, at 8 a.m., I did something I’ve wanted to do for as long as I can remember: I became an American. I first applied for a visa in early 2011, and since then I have slowly worked my way through the system — first as a visa-holder, then as a permanent resident (green card), and, finally, as a ... Read More
Politics & Policy

CNN’s Shameful Town Hall

CNN recently hosted an anti-gun town hall featuring a number of grieving children and parents from Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., who aimed their ire at the National Rifle Association, politicians peripherally associated with the NRA, and anyone who didn’t say exactly what they wanted to hear. ... Read More

The Gun-Control Debate Could Break America

Last night, the nation witnessed what looked a lot like an extended version of the famous “two minutes hate” from George Orwell’s novel 1984. During a CNN town hall on gun control, a furious crowd of Americans jeered at two conservatives, Marco Rubio and Dana Loesch, who stood in defense of the Second ... Read More