From Louisiana, San Francisco, Oregon, and Washington, D.C., politicians are hoping a wave of new tough-on-crime proposals and laws will prevent crime, reversing criminal justice reforms that were implemented years ago.
Political leaders from both major political parties believe crime is rising, and the way to fix that is to get tough on crime. But "tough-on-crime" laws are more effective in boosting incarceration rates without evidence of effectiveness in deterring crime, experts say. It is a change of course from the momentum that followed the police killing of George Floyd, leading to criminal justice reforms.
After Floyd's death, states passed hundreds of reform bills, including chokehold bans and other use-of-force guidelines, while several cities vowed to invest in community programs and crisis response teams to assist with behavioral-health-related calls.
Protestors march with George Floyd signs during the 57th annual March on Washington, Friday, August 28, 2020 in Washington, D.C. , Maryland. Also referred to as the Get Off Our Necks march, this years march focused on the recent Black Lives Matter movement while commemorating the work of previous civil rights leaders. (Photo by Erin Lefevre/NurPhoto via Getty Images)
Now, in certain states, politicians have led efforts to grant more power to police, increase criminal penalties, mandate drug treatment as a condition for welfare benefits, and repeal other laws that allow courts to prosecute younger individuals.
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, for example, recently blamed a law signed by the former governor in 2017 for "rampant crime,” according to his March 1 opinion piece in the Shreveport Times. State lawmakers there passed legislation during a special session on crime, including a measure that now allows courts to prosecute 17-year-olds as young adults, the Plaquemine Post South reported.
The Republican governor approved efforts to increase the variety of execution methods for capital punishment and limit opportunities for parole and early release. Critics, such as the ACLU of Louisiana, testified against two of the bills, arguing “they were costly and not likely to reduce crime now,” USA Today wrote. Also, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Matthew Willard of New Orleans had similar arguments, saying they will not stop crime before it happens.
Shari Stone-Mediatore, co-founder of advocacy group Parole Illinois and a professor at Ohio Wesleyan University, told USA Today those strict laws attempt to combat crime by stigmatizing offenders rather than addressing underlying issues.
This approach leads to mass incarceration, disrupts families and communities, and disproportionately affects people of color, she said. “It’s not a productive way to deal with social problems” like drug addiction or unemployment, Stone-Mediatore said.
Meanwhile, lawmakers in San Francisco
