Disparity And DiscriminationEssay Preview: Disparity And DiscriminationReport this essayDisparity and DiscriminationPenny TurbervilleCJA 420/Cultural Diversity in Criminal JusticeJohn FranceMarch 26, 2007Disparity and DiscriminationDisparity can be defined as an inequality while discrimination can be defined as a prejudice. I will set forward to define these terms as they relate to the criminal justice system and how the terms relate to one another. I will also provide examples of each.
In criminal justice disparity means that there is a difference, but that that difference does not automatically mean discrimination (Walker 16). On the other hand in criminal justice the term discrimination means to treat people differently because of them being a certain race or religion without regarding the individuals behavior or other qualifications (Walker 16).
An example of disparity could be the facts that in eastern Tennessee blacks receive sentences that are 24% longer than whites for committing the same crime. Nationwide white people receive an average sentence of thirty three month while blacks received an average of thirty six months (Smith 41). Another example of disparity could be requiring a photo identification card to vote. Poor people who live in the inner city and do not drive probably do not have a drivers license and they may not have a bank account and therefore would have no other reason for a photo identification card. Homeless people would also have no address and probably no photo identification card. This would not be intentional discrimination, but it would be an example of disparity because it would discriminate against the poor or homeless even though this was not the intentional motive.
The Supreme Court has ruled that such language should be part of a law and not a rule. The Supreme Court has stated that blacks are not entitled to have photo identification unless the “purpose of the act remains undefiled or the victim bears the burden of proof.” The only relevant part of the law that makes a distinction between blacks and whites is the definition of who has a photo identification card — an understanding based on racial stereotypes.
The Supreme Court is more willing to say that the law is constitutional because it is not discriminatory because in addition to criminal cases in which black individuals may have personal or family ties or political support, it is also criminal. If the law is not designed to give specific instructions to a black family member, then the law would not provide those instructions. Thus, it is not discriminatory to have all family members have no photo identification because there is no legal requirement that all family members have a photo identification and because the criminal law does not require a person to have a photo identification.
So the question of racial discrimination is not a simple one, but the question is: Which category? And in doing so, do they cover racial preferences?
The Black Vote
In the first few decades of this century, a significant number of AfricanAmericans, and the majority of Whites (more than 70 percent in 1990), supported the legalization of voting. Yet in the 1970s this support diminished, as many Blacks and minorities moved toward the Democratic Party and supported party candidates who spoke the opposition to same-sex marriage and other anti-equality policies.
With the passage of Prop 8 — one of the landmark anti-voting bills in the nation — this support had increased for a few years. But it was not enough to ensure political results in the 1980s and early 1990s. The anti-marriage and anti-gay policies were challenged in court, and as a result political parties saw a need to bring forth major reforms, including the criminalization of gay marriage. The Civil Rights Movement was the most successful campaign for political change in the 1960s and 1970s, with the eventual signing of several laws that protected and encouraged marriage by all racial groups.
With all the changes in Washington and the federal government, the civil society movement for civil equality was in a state of flux. To help explain why, we will consider eight areas that have changed in the last half century:
1. Political Parties that Don’t Want Justice
In 1992, the United States Supreme Court upheld a federal appeals court’s ruling that a Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), as a 501(c)(3) organization, had no legal right to refuse to collect or use money from churches that sought to undermine the government’s role in promoting a “good and charitable” society through its endorsement and use of government funding. The court had ruled that a nonprofit church could not do business with a nonprofit to provide “political support,” and that was unconstitutional. The SPLC challenged the government’s interpretation of that ruling, but that decision was affirmed by the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that SPLC was not prohibited by the government from accepting funds from a local or federal agency, whether in connection with its activities or through its nonprofit.
With increasing activism in the 1960s and early 1970s, the SPLC’s role became increasingly important. It made political contributions to and from local and federal candidates running in several states. It also spent large amounts of their time and resources and was involved in elections and public policy campaigns
The Supreme Court has ruled that such language should be part of a law and not a rule. The Supreme Court has stated that blacks are not entitled to have photo identification unless the “purpose of the act remains undefiled or the victim bears the burden of proof.” The only relevant part of the law that makes a distinction between blacks and whites is the definition of who has a photo identification card — an understanding based on racial stereotypes.
The Supreme Court is more willing to say that the law is constitutional because it is not discriminatory because in addition to criminal cases in which black individuals may have personal or family ties or political support, it is also criminal. If the law is not designed to give specific instructions to a black family member, then the law would not provide those instructions. Thus, it is not discriminatory to have all family members have no photo identification because there is no legal requirement that all family members have a photo identification and because the criminal law does not require a person to have a photo identification.
So the question of racial discrimination is not a simple one, but the question is: Which category? And in doing so, do they cover racial preferences?
The Black Vote
In the first few decades of this century, a significant number of AfricanAmericans, and the majority of Whites (more than 70 percent in 1990), supported the legalization of voting. Yet in the 1970s this support diminished, as many Blacks and minorities moved toward the Democratic Party and supported party candidates who spoke the opposition to same-sex marriage and other anti-equality policies.
With the passage of Prop 8 — one of the landmark anti-voting bills in the nation — this support had increased for a few years. But it was not enough to ensure political results in the 1980s and early 1990s. The anti-marriage and anti-gay policies were challenged in court, and as a result political parties saw a need to bring forth major reforms, including the criminalization of gay marriage. The Civil Rights Movement was the most successful campaign for political change in the 1960s and 1970s, with the eventual signing of several laws that protected and encouraged marriage by all racial groups.
With all the changes in Washington and the federal government, the civil society movement for civil equality was in a state of flux. To help explain why, we will consider eight areas that have changed in the last half century:
1. Political Parties that Don’t Want Justice
In 1992, the United States Supreme Court upheld a federal appeals court’s ruling that a Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), as a 501(c)(3) organization, had no legal right to refuse to collect or use money from churches that sought to undermine the government’s role in promoting a “good and charitable” society through its endorsement and use of government funding. The court had ruled that a nonprofit church could not do business with a nonprofit to provide “political support,” and that was unconstitutional. The SPLC challenged the government’s interpretation of that ruling, but that decision was affirmed by the 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that SPLC was not prohibited by the government from accepting funds from a local or federal agency, whether in connection with its activities or through its nonprofit.
With increasing activism in the 1960s and early 1970s, the SPLC’s role became increasingly important. It made political contributions to and from local and federal candidates running in several states. It also spent large amounts of their time and resources and was involved in elections and public policy campaigns
Racial profiling could be an example of discrimination. Whenever airport security stops someone because they appear to be from the Middle East, this would be discrimination. When black people are stopped by traffic police officers more than white people, and especially if they percentage of black people stopped is a lot higher percentage than the black population in the area, that is an example of discrimination.
Discrimination does not have to be only about a persons race. Discrimination can also be against ones gender, sexual orientation, height, weight and many other factors. An example of disparity that might have a reason is a law or rule that requires police officers to be a certain weight that is in proportion to their height. While