‘A stunning turnabout’: Voters and lawmakers across US move to reverse criminal justice reform

Pendulum swinging across decades led to reforms during last 15 years

Less than four years after George Floyd’s murder sparked a mass awakening to the inequities of the criminal justice system, political leaders across the country are returning to a tough-on-crime approach. In some cases, voters and lawmakers are opting to reverse reforms passed years ago.

San Francisco and D.C. expand police powers

San Francisco voted Tuesday in support of two propositions that give more power to police and require addiction treatment as a condition for welfare assistance. D.C. Council members also passed a package of public safety measures Tuesday, including bringing back “drug-free zones.”

Pendulum swinging across decades led to reforms during last 15 years

Gelb said the pattern like a pendulum swinging between restriction and reform starts as early as the 60s when a wave of reform led into a spike in crime in the 70s. The 80s brought in the crack crisis and a “get tough era,” Gelb said. Over the next three decades, mandatory sentencing, a boom in prison development and harsher drug enforcement tactics led to a ballooning in the prison population.

Louisiana, Oregon repeal previous reforms, critics say ineffective in public safety

In an opinion piece in the Shreveport Times, part of the USA TODAY Network, Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry explicitly blamed the Louisiana Justice Reinvestment Act signed by the former governor in 2017 for “rampant crime.” He kicked off a Legislative Special Session on crime, including pushing through a measure that repealed a law passed in 2017 and now allows courts to prosecute 17-year-olds as young adults.

Similar concerns were raised in Oregon, where the House passed a bill repealing part of Measure 110, a 2020 voter-approved measure to decriminalize drug possession. Critics of the new bill say the state’s criminal justice system is already overwhelmed, and recriminalizing would disproportionally affect Black and Latino Oregonians, the Statesman Journal reported.

San Francisco, D.C. expand police powers by ballot and council

San Francisco voters showed great support on Super Tuesday for two measures put on the ballot by Democratic Mayor London Breed. Proposition E grants police greater agency through less paperwork and wider drone use. Proposition F requires adult welfare recipients who use drugs to receive treatment as a condition of receiving benefits.

D.C. Council members just passed an omnibus bill that brings together several public safety provisions raised over the last year. According to The Washington Post, the Secure D.C. Omnibus Amendment Act includes provisions such as judges being able to more easily order some to be detained while awaiting trial for violent offenses, expanding the definition of carjacking for prosecution, considering “organized retail theft” a new felony, and establishing temporary “Drug-free zones” to address drug-related loitering.

‘A ratchet, not a pendulum’

While national data on crime rates is notoriously difficult to track, statistics collected and analyzed from cities across the U.S. show a spike of violent offenses and drop in property crime during the pandemic. But that data suggests that most types of crime are reverting back towards pre-pandemic levels.

Gelb said the goal should actually be the recent lows in 2014, before the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri further ruptured public trust in police.

He also acknowledged that some policies that have popped up recently may be intended to send a message about crime tolerance rather than stop crime directly, noting that downward trends might not necessarily make people feel safe.

Gelb also says that even though this wave of tough-on-crime laws may seem like that pendulum is headed back to that era, he doesn’t think it will be that extreme.

“It is a ratchet. It’s not a pendulum,” Gelb said. “They’re not going back to the way it was before. They’re shaving off the most aggressive edges and dialing things back rather than completely rejecting a balanced approach.”

Contributing: John Dupont, Post South; Dianne Lugo, Salem Statesman Journal; Greg Hilburn, Shreveport Times; Joedy McCreary, USA TODAY

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

SDGs Addressed:

1. SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

Targets Identified:

• Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere
• Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking, and all forms of violence against and torture of children
• Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all
• Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels

Indicators:

• Indicator 16.1.1: Number of victims of intentional homicide per 100,000 population, by sex and age
• Indicator 16.2.1: Proportion of children aged 1-17 years who experienced any physical punishment and/or psychological aggression by caregivers in the past month
• Indicator 16.3.1: Proportion of victims of violence in the previous 12 months who reported their victimization to competent authorities or other officially recognized conflict resolution mechanisms
• Indicator 16.6.1: Primary government expenditures as a proportion of original approved budget, by sector (or by budget codes or similar)

Analysis:

The article primarily addresses issues related to the criminal justice system and the recent trend of returning to a tough-on-crime approach in various parts of the United States. The following analysis identifies the relevant SDGs, targets, and indicators based on the content of the article:

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The main SDG addressed in the article is SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions. This goal focuses on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies, providing access to justice for all, and building effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s content, the following targets can be identified:

• Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere
• Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking, and all forms of violence against and torture of children
• Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all
• Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, there are indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets:

• Indicator 16.1.1: Number of victims of intentional homicide per 100,000 population, by sex and age
• Indicator 16.2.1: Proportion of children aged 1-17 years who experienced any physical punishment and/or psychological aggression by caregivers in the past month
• Indicator 16.3.1: Proportion of victims of violence in the previous 12 months who reported their victimization to competent authorities or other officially recognized conflict resolution mechanisms
• Indicator 16.6.1: Primary government expenditures as a proportion of original approved budget, by sector (or by budget codes or similar)

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: usatoday.com

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.