By: Megan T. Stevenson and Robynn J.A. Cox

This Article tells the story of the birth of predictive algorithms in criminal justice. Known as risk assessments, these tools are widely used today to make decisions about bail, sentencing, and parole. Their roots trace back to the 1920s, when statistical prediction tools were first proposed for use in criminal justice decision-making. In this Article, we show that risk assessment found its origins in the ideas of eugenic criminology: namely, that crime is mostly caused by an inferior subclass of humanity, tainted from birth. Risk assessment was conceptualized as a way of sorting between the “normals” who were amenable to reform and the “sub-normals” who, due to their inferior genes, were not. Such “born criminals” were seen as requiring indefinite confinement within isolated penal colonies in order to protect society from crime, prevent procreation, and provide care for those in need of paternalistic guidance. We tell this story in part because it is a fascinating piece of history, marked by bigotry, bravado, and an almost fanatical optimism about mankind’s ability to engineer a perfect society. But we also tell it because the ideas and practices of eugenic criminology are not widely known. While “tainted origins” do not automatically condemn the ongoing use of risk assessment, understanding history can help identify ways that the past lives on in the present.

By Roland Neil, Bonnie Ghosh-Dastidar, Beau Kilmer, Michael W. Robbins, Kristin Warren

Objectives

Racial disparities in arrests are a major concern, particularly when it comes to drug enforcement. In 2021, Oregon decriminalized the possession of controlled substances as part of Measure 110 (M-110), an unprecedented policy change in the United States. We estimate how M-110 affected five types of arrests, overall and by race.

Methods

National Incident-Based Reporting System data covering 3,642 police agencies from 43 states for 2018-2023 are combined with 2020 Census data. We extend a synthetic control methodology developed for micro-level data to test whether policy effects differ across groups and whether policies affect disparities, using permutation inference to quantify uncertainty.

Results

M-110 reduced drug possession arrest rates in Oregon for the overall population (67.8%) and for the three racial groups we focus on: Black (75.6%), Hispanic (77.5%); and White (66.2%), with the reduction being statistically significantly larger for Hispanic and Black than White individuals. M-110 reduced disorder arrest rates by 30.9% for Black individuals, which is statistically significantly different from zero and the White estimate. Black-White rate differences in drug possession arrests fell by 79.5% and in disorder arrests by 41.7%. In general, M-110 did not affect arrest rates for violent, property, or drug trafficking offenses.

Conclusions

M-110 reduced drug possession arrests while reducing Black-White rate differences. M-110 led to a decrease in disorder arrests for Black individuals, suggesting police did not substitute one arrest type for another for this population. Our method offers a new approach for examining heterogeneous policy effects and how policies affect disparities.

By Miriam Driessen 

Political and legal immunity are justified by the principle that certain social aims outweigh the value of imposing liability. To be exempt from the rules, however, is a privilege granted to or demanded by the powerful. The structural disparities that underpin immunity can turn it into an unjust prerogative, one that is inscribed by global inequalities.  Set against the backdrop of an extraordinary wave of litigation against Chinese corporations in Ethiopia, Immunity on Trial probes the question of immunity in everyday encounters steeped in highly asymmetrical power relations. Drawing on observations from the courthouse, interviews with litigants, judges, and court support staff, and analyses of case files, Miriam Driessen demonstrates how immunity is debated and delegitimized—or affirmed—by those who fight, exact, grant, or weigh it. From the construction site to the police station, from the registrar’s office into the courtroom, she documents tussles over immunity, unraveling the politics of dignity on which they are founded.

Oakland: : University of California Press, 2026. 

By Li Sian Goh, Michael Rempel, and Joanna Weill

This report examines the alignment of New York City judges’ pretrial release decisions with the recommendations of the Pretrial Release Assessment, a validated tool that calculates the likelihood people will return to court if they are released before trial. Drawing on 251,917 New York City arraignments subject to pretrial release decisions in 2021, 2022, and 2023, we looked at what the assessment recommended, how often judges followed these recommendations, and cross-borough differences over time.

Key Findings:

Most People are Recommended for Release on Recognizance (ROR): From 2021 to 2023, the Release Assessment recommended releasing people on their own recognizance (ROR) for 88% of cases, including 79% of violent felonies, 77% of nonviolent felonies, and 92% of misdemeanors. Yet judges granted ROR in only 25% of violent felonies, 42% of nonviolent felonies, and 78% of misdemeanors.The Assessment Was Consistent Across Each Race/Ethnicity: The assessment recommended 87% of Black, 88% of Hispanic, and 85% of white people for ROR. For people charged with a violent felony, the assessment recommended a statistically identical 78% of Black and Hispanic and 77% of white people for ROR.Alignment with the Release Assessment’s Recommendations: From 2021 to 2023, judges infrequently followed ROR recommendations for violent felony cases (30%), only followed such recommendations about half the time (51%) in nonviolent felony cases, while adhering at a high rate for misdemeanors (83%). Conversely, in violent felony cases that are virtually all legally eligible for bail under the State’s bail reform law, judges set bail or remand in 41% of the cases where the Release Assessment had recommended ROR.Judges Aligned with the Assessment at Racially Disparate Rates: When the assessment recommended ROR in a violent felony case, judges set it least often for Black people (26%), somewhat more for Hispanic people (32%), and most often for white people (43%). In these same cases, judges were more likely to impose bail or remand on Black (44%) than Hispanic (39%) or white people (29%). Further analysis linked these racial differences to a tendency of judges to overrate certain risk factors correlated with race/ethnicity.Overrating Certain Risk Factors: Although criminal history and living situation are already factored into the assessment’s recommendations, judges were more likely to adhere to a ROR recommendation when people had no prior warrants, no prior misdemeanor or felony convictions, and a stable abode than when one of these risk factors was present.Alignment Varied Across the City: Bronx and Brooklyn judges followed a ROR recommendation at the highest and Staten Island judges at the lowest rate. Nonviolent felonies saw especially wide borough variability. (For example, people facing a nonviolent felony charge and recommended for ROR were 1.8 times more likely to receive it in the Bronx than in Manhattan or Staten Island.)

By John R. Lott, et al.

After peaking in 2022, the number of Concealed Carry Permit holders across the United States has declined for the third year in a row. The total now sits at 20.88 million, representing a 2.7% drop from last year. A major factor behind this ongoing decrease is the widespread adoption of Constitutional Carry laws. Following Louisiana’s implementation of permitless carry on July 4, 2024, 29 states now allow residents to carry without a permit. As a result, 46.8% of Americans (157.6 million) now live in Constitutional Carry States, with 67.7% of the land in the country (2.57 million square miles). Although no additional states enacted such laws this year, the broader trend remains unchanged. Unlike gun ownership surveys that may be affected by people’s unwillingness to answer personal questions, concealed handgun permit data is the only really “hard data” that we have, but it becomes a less accurate measure as more states become Constitutional Carry states.

Salt Lake City UK: Crime Prevention Research Center, 2025