Economic Threat Or Economic Hardship? The Role Of Local Socioeconomic Conditions On Sentencing Outcomes

• In Event: Racial, Economic, and Political Threat in Punishment

Abstract

Judges have the discretion to not only adjust sentences to each defendant’s circumstances, but to also tailor sentences to the needs of their communities. Economic threat theory and the Rusche-Kirchheimer hypothesis specifically predict that jurisdictions with higher concentrations of socioeconomic disadvantage will have more punitive sentencing decisions to maintain the power of the economically privileged or to control to the criminal threat posed by the socioeconomically disadvantaged. Sentencing studies using data from the 1990s provide some support for these theories. However, since the early 2000s, the United States has undergone many socioeconomic changes including the Great Recession and growing concentrated poverty. In light of national dialogue about how socioeconomic conditions can disadvantage individuals and communities, I propose the hardships hypothesis. More specifically, in recognition of their community’s socioeconomic disadvantages, judges sentence defendants more leniently because severe sentences may sever community ties which would further harm their communities. This study provides a new picture of the relationship between local socioeconomic conditions and incarceration, sentence length, and conformity to sentencing guidelines. To assess this relationship, I use multilevel models with 2016-2019 Pennsylvania sentencing data. Findings may reinvigorate theory-building on the role of socioeconomic conditions in case decision-making.

Author

• Ashley Elizabeth Rodriguez, The Pennsylvania State University