Mary Moriarty’s approach to racial disparities is the wrong solution to a real problem

Minnesota is among the worst states in the U S when it comes to racial disparities across a range of issues including housing income educational performance and criminal justice It is no surprise that as we approach the fifth anniversary of George Floyd s murder Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty wants to do something to address these disparities by asking her staff to consider the race of individuals when making prosecutorial decisions While she should be commended for her intentions her approach uses the wrong tool to fix the predicament At the same time the response to Moriarty s framework by the Center for the American Experiment s David Zimmer while correct in its description of crime victimization also downplays the predicament of institutional racism that impacts the fairness of the criminal justice system Minnesota and specifically Hennepin County has a race matter More than years ago I was part of a research band pointing to the Twin Cities as one of the most of racially and economically segregated metropolitan areas in America We documented the disparities in housing and how they impacted training But the disparities extend beyond schools and neighborhoods In the Minnesota House Select Committee on Racial Justice Statement revealed disparities across a range of issues including housing fitness wealth wages and criminal justice Minnesota remains among the worst in the nation when it comes to racial disparities in all aspects of the criminal justice system including police stops searches arrests charging and incarceration A assessment issued by the Minnesota Supreme Court concludes that there is racial bias in the judicial system These disparities have produced secondary effects including significantly lower voter registration and turnout for racial minorities as well as a critical issue with their exclusion from juries George Floyd s murder personifies the race issue in the state and Hennepin County Moreover nationally we know that persons of color have been casualties of prosecutorial abuse either as a conclusion of explicit or implicit biases Given the above one should appreciate the dilemma Moriarty is seeking to address but there are problems with her approach One for good or bad the U S Supreme Court has moved the interpretation of the Equal Protection clause to render any considerations of race unconstitutional The newest Students for Fair Admissions v Harvard decision banning the use of race in college admissions is an example of this approach The court is also skeptical about considerations of race when it comes to redistricting and employment It is quite viable that Moriarty s strategy stating that race should be considered in prosecutorial decisions might be unconstitutional This is even before the Trump administration was pressing hard against diversity equity and inclusion DEI efforts All this suggests that Moriarty s office may be facing lawsuits from defendants and the U S Department of Justice if it moves forward with this strategy Two keep in mind that foreseen prosecutorial decisions that use race as a mitigating factor ignore the fact that persons of color are disproportionately casualties of crime Mitigating criminal culpability on the basis of race fails to take seriously the racial victimization of crime Persons of color are far more likely to be casualties of multiple crimes including violent ones compared with non-whites Zimmer correctly notes this in his critique of Moriarty s program With the notable exception of hate crimes the U S Department of Justice and other researchers have ascertained that much of this crime is unfortunately intraracial People victimize those who live near them and because of persistent racial segregation this means nationally and in Hennepin County persons of color are more likely to victimize persons of color David Schultz Mitigating criminal responsibility based on the race of the alleged perpetrator effectively says that crime against persons of color should not be treated as seriously compared with those who are white It also suggests the persons of color potentially are less able to obey the law compared with whites Three the criminal law is the wrong tool to address societal and institutional racism Already the criminal justice system is demanded to address problems of domestic abuse substance abuse and domestic violence At best the justice system is a crude tool to address these issues The racial problems we need to fix include those noted by the Minnesota House Committee If race has caused social disparities fix the disparities This is the part Zimmer appears to downplay in the Minnesota Star Tribune article in which he is quoted The criminal justice system is biased as a conclusion of other factors and does not seem to offer a key regarding how to fix them Lady Justice contrary to his comments is not blindfolded but biased However the fix is not to ignore the bias but work to correct it across other institutions that are driving the problems in the criminal justice system A fair criminal justice system recognizes that all persons regardless of race should be expected to obey the law But a fair criminal justice system should reflect a quality of mercy that is not strained and background social injustices need to be fixed to secure that fairness David Schultz is a distinguished professor of political science at Hamline University He teaches in political science legal studies and environmental studies The post Mary Moriarty s approach to racial disparities is the wrong explanation to a real obstacle appeared first on MinnPost