Search

This study examined a national sample of more than 600 Black Americans and their views on bias in the American criminal justice system. The research found that 26% of the Black respondents did not believe there was bias in the American criminal justice system. To explore the segment of respondents holding these views, we separated the sample into Blacks who believe there is bias in the system (referred to as the discrimination thesis or DT supporters) and those who opposed this belief (referred to as the no-discrimination thesis or NDT supporters). The NDT supporters were more likely to be younger, male, less educated, and have lower income than those respondents who supported the DT. NDT supporters were also more likely to believe that Blacks and Whites had equal job opportunities, have more confidence in the police, and believe that racism was not widespread. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

As an anomaly of extant literature that maintains Blacks as a collective are less supportive of racial profiling than other ethnic groups, this article explores the backgrounds of Blacks who support the practice of racial profiling (referred to as Black Supporters). This study analyzed a national Gallup poll that included measures on profiling and had a significant number of Black respondents (N = 534). Black Supporters tended to be female; live in the Southern United States; and be politically conservative. Although multivariate analyses revealed few differences between Black Supporters and nonsupporters, the study represents an earnest attempt to explore Black support for a policing strategy that has both historically and contemporarily had negative effects on Black communities. We conclude the article by discussing the benefits of studying Black Supporters. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article examines the public opinion of randomly selected Pennsylvanians on their support for racial profiling at airports. The 2009 Penn State Poll revealed that most Pennsylvanians felt that profiling was occurring at airports—but did not support the practice. Building on prior research, the research introduced three new measures into the area of public opinion on racial profiling. These included the role of perceived effectiveness, perceived discrimination, and ethical values in influencing public opinion on racial profiling. Respondents who felt racial profiling in airports was effective and was discriminatory were more likely to believe it was occurring. In terms of support for racial profiling, those who felt the practice was discriminatory and unethical were less likely to support it, whereas conversely, those who felt the practice was effective tended to support its use. We argue that the public needs to be better informed about the strategies that have been proven to be most effective in reducing the threat of terrorist attacks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the results of research that analyzed asset forfeiture litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals. More specifically, the research focused on the characteristics and outcomes of 193 cases in which plaintiffs were seeking the return of assets. The research also examined the predictors of success for plaintiffs in these cases. Among the findings, we found that most assets were seized through criminal proceedings and involved cash forfeitures. When forfeiture proceedings began, however, 94% were carried out using the civil process. Plaintiffs lost most of the cases, but several variables significantly increased or decreased the likelihood of winning. When the plaintiff was a corporation, and when the case originated through the criminal asset forfeiture proceeding, the likelihood of the plaintiff prevailing increased. However, gender (specifically, being male), third-party involvement, and cash forfeitures reduced the likelihood of the plaintiff ’s winning. This article discusses the implications of these findings and suggests future directions for asset forfeiture research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores citizens' views on racial profiling at airports. A recent Gallup poll allowed for analyses of the perception of Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites concerning whether they felt racial profiling at airports was widespread and/or justified. Multivariate analyses revealed that Blacks were more likely than Whites to believe profiling at airports was widespread. There were, however, no differences between the opinions of Whites and Hispanics on the extent of profiling in airports. Racial and ethnic minorities were less likely than Whites to believe that profiling at airports was justified. The implications of the results are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]