It’s up to all of us—Black, White, everyone—no matter how well-meaning we think we might be, to do the honest, uncomfortable work of rooting it out. It starts with self-examination and listening to those whose lives are different from our own. It ends with justice, compassion, and empathy that manifests in our lives and on our streets.
—Michelle Obama, J.D.

Your social identity affects your experience with justice, how you understand what justice is, and how you will respond to this chapter, and this textbook, which is written with an equity lens. It is easy to think we live in a country where every family has equitable access to opportunity, representation, and justice, but we must recognize the ways in which justice is distributed unevenly. Justice has many definitions, but it typically involves equal access or opportunity, equal treatment, and equal rights.

The intent of this chapter and this text is to uncover the ways in which representation and justice contribute to inequity in family experiences in the United States. When we talk about families, we are moving far beyond the social construction of “family” (as discussed in Chapter 1) and the ways that government and other institutions define “family” for taxes, health care, and other legal rights and responsibilities. We are including all the ways that people define their own families. It is our aspirational goal to inspire readers to understand injustice more deeply and to advocate and contribute to changes toward greater equity, or justice, for families in the United States.

What Is Justice?

Justice has been defined in many ways. Here, we will share a few of the kinds of justice that affect families and communities. As you read this section and the students’ essays, see if you can identify these kinds of justice.

• Procedural justice refers to the process used in an organization. There are four principles, often referred to as the four pillars: 1) being fair in processes, 2) being transparent in actions, 3) providing an opportunity for voice, and 4) being impartial in decision-making (Organizational change through decision-making and policy: A new procedural justice course for managers and supervisors. (n.d.).
• Distributive justice refers to the ways that valued materials and services are distributed. But this, in itself, raises questions related to fairness, equality, and equity. Recall those definitions from Chapter 1? Should everyone get what they need? Or should everyone get exactly the same thing? Who gets to decide what the formula for distribution is?
• Retributive justice is focused on punishment or some kind of penalty for doing something wrong. It could include the idea that the punishment must match the wrongful behavior and that there is moral justification for returning suffering to the wrongdoer (Bedau, 1978).
• Restorative justice was discussed at length in Chapter 9 and refers to an intentional way of handling an offense and involves three stakeholders within an organization or community: the person(s) who has offended the person(s) who were harmed, and communities of care and reconciliation (Wachtel, 2016).

We have already described environmental justice in Chapter 10, specifically focused on the places where families eat, work, and live. There are disproportionate ways that poor families and families with people of color (POC) are more likely to be exposed to harmful environments that have lead and poor air quality, for example, and have less access to positive environmental aspects such as parks to play in and trees lining the streets and sidewalks. Although this text tends to use the word “equity” rather than social justice, these terms are closely related. Social justice can be thought of as equal rights, equal opportunities, and equal treatment for all, regardless of social identities. Like environmental justice, it also focuses on taking meaningful action to correct past discrimination.

The Social Construction of Justice and Criminality

The common law system of justice is generally used in the United States. Common law, or case law, is law that is derived primarily from the court system. When a case is tried and decided in a court, it can affect civil law, which are laws created by governing bodies such as state legislatures and the federal congress.

The level a particular court holds will affect whether counties, states, or the whole country will see a change in law based on the decision. Who makes those court decisions? While juries are involved in some cases, judges ultimately make many decisions before a case even appears before a jury. Judges also make decisions along the way about what evidence, witnesses, and motions will be allowed. Many cases are decided by a single judge or a panel of judges, without a jury. This is true for the United States Supreme Court, pictured in figure 11.1, the Regional Appeals Courts, and many lower-level courts. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States; decisions made by this court affect civil laws and all existing related case law in the country.

Who judges are, their experiences, their beliefs, and their backgrounds have a big impact on all citizens of the United States. Judges in the United States must meet requirements such as having a Juris Doctorate (law degree), passing the bar exam, and practicing law.

The Social Construction of Criminality

Like every system created by human beings, the criminal justice system is a social construction. We have created and defined structures, roles, and institutions that we tacitly agree to abide by. Ideas such as justice, rehabilitation, “paying a debt to society,” and criminality all have definitions that have changed over time and location.

For example, let’s look briefly at the plant marijuana, which is frequently dried to be smoked, has oil extracted, or is otherwise ingested or applied. Is it a valuable medicine? Is it an illegal drug? Is it bad for you? Is it a comparable form of recreation to alcohol? Is it an essential service in the time of COVID-19? Are you a criminal if you use it? The answers to these questions vary based on location (federal, state, and county laws) and over time. In addition, your profession or your employer may find it to be criminal even if the state law does not. Cannabis flowers contain many different psychoactive compounds that are used for recreational or medicinal purposes. The plant goes by many different names: marijuana, pot, weed, dope, reefer, blunt, mota, 420, Mary Jane, and others.

From this example, you can see how a social construction can determine whether something (in this case, a plant) is perceived to be criminal, medicinal, or recreational. The most common use of marijuana for medical reasons is for chronic pain control, which has been found to be effective for millions of Americans (Grinspoon, 2020). Based on location, someone who uses this plant medicinally may be branded a criminal rather than a patient treating a medical problem. We will extend this idea to people: how social constructions such as gender, race, poverty, and sexuality translate into justice being interpreted and applied unevenly to different people based on implicit bias and the socially constructed difference of identities.

Race, Legal, and Extralegal Justice

We know that the original construction of equality in the United States actually referred to equality amongst White male landowners (as described at the start of this chapter). The purpose of this textbook is to examine the needs and experiences of current American families, and some exploration of history is helpful for context. There exists a disparity in the United States currently related to criminality and justice. This can be traced back to the poverty, bias, and institutional discrimination that Black people have faced not just during slavery but through post-emancipation Jim Crow laws and the racial caste system that limited income, wealth accumulation, and rights of African Americans. For example, Black people were limited from using bathrooms, drinking from water fountains, sitting in certain seats in restaurants and transportation, and generally segregated to separate locations in public spaces, including libraries and schools (figure 11.2). These laws lasted for about 100 years until the Civil Rights Act was signed in 1968.

A result of these laws was the criminalization of everyday actions by Black people, performed in spaces that were either explicitly or implicitly for White people. This resulted in both formal punishment, such as imprisonment, but also the beating and lynching of Black people. Families continued to be broken up, not through slavery, but now through violence, imprisonment, and death for the socially constructed criminality of being in the wrong place or talking with the wrong person. Multiracial interactions were stigmatized, and Black men were consistently punished for any interaction with a White woman. Class, gender, and race intersected in a way that often led to Black men being killed or imprisoned by legal or extralegal means.

In February 2020, Ahmaud Arbery was killed while out jogging. Three men believed that he looked “suspicious” and similar to someone who committed a burglary weeks earlier, so they armed themselves with a shotgun and a handgun, chased him, and shot him dead. The New York Times reported that many Black people who jog to stay fit and relieve stress wrote about the dangers of “running while Black.” They describe staying in parks rather than running on neighborhood streets, wearing brightly colored shirts and shoes to signify that they are joggers, avoiding new areas, and taking care to call out “hello” or “excuse me” in order to signal to people that they are friendly (figure 11.3). These actions are intended to keep people from harassing or harming them (Futterman & Minsberg, 2020).

The Criminalization of Poverty

Organizations such as the American Bar Association and media outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post have all written extensively about the criminalization of poverty. Many crimes are punished by fees and fines in addition to some kind of incarceration (jail, prison, probation, or parole sentences). Incarceration affects individuals and families by the loss of autonomy, parenting and family connections, as well as loss of income (figure 11.4). Many people will lose their jobs, so even when they finish their sentence, they will be unemployed. Finding employment and housing is more difficult with a criminal record. Add on top of this, there is the payment of fines and fees.

Families with accumulated wealth and higher incomes will be able to pay these fees and fines more quickly than a family that has not accumulated wealth or has a low-paying job. In some states, if interest and additional fees accrue, it can lead to additional incarceration, loss of a driving license, or loss of an occupational license, making it more difficult to earn money with which to pay the fines. This affects the financial, physical, and mental health of families. Examples such as a 12-month sentence for stealing a can of beer, three days in jail for catching a fish off-season, and 22 days in jail for not having enough money to pay fees when appearing in court are cited by the National Public Radio investigation into court fees and the incarceration of poor people who cannot pay them. This shows how being poor more likely results in becoming a “criminal.” You can listen to the 12-minute report here: As Court Fees Rise, the Poor are Paying the Price.

Incarcerated Family Members

Approximately half of all adults in the United States have had an immediate family member incarcerated for one or more nights in prison, raising incarceration in the United States to the level of a social problem. Incarceration disproportionately impacts low-income families and POC. Compared to White adults, Black adults are three times more likely to have had a family member incarcerated, and Latine adults are 1.7 times more likely to have had a family member incarcerated for more than one year. Adults with lower household incomes (less than $25,000) are three times more likely than adults with a household income of $100,000 or more to have a family member incarcerated for a year or more.

In the following essay, Human Services major Heather Denherder describes her experience with working through her addiction-associated criminal background and toward her career passion of working with families. Along the way, she uncovered realizations about the role that race plays in her journey.

Comprehension Self Check

Licenses and Attributions for Justice: An Introduction

Open Content, Original

“Justice: An Introduction” by Elizabeth B. Pearce. License: CC BY 4.0.

“In Focus: Career, Criminality, and Race” by Heather Denherder. License: CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

Open Content, Shared Previously

Figure 11.1. Photograph by Fred Schilling, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States. Public domain.

Figure 11.2. “White and Colored People’s Water Fountains” by David Wilson. License: CC BY 2.0.

Figure 11.3. “Man wearing blue and black jacket and pants running on road” on Pickpik.com .License: Royalty Free on pickpik.com

Figure 11.4. Photograph by Wendy Alvarez. License: Unsplash license.

References

Beadu, H.A. (1978) Retribution and the Theory of Punishment. JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY Volume: 75 Issue: 11 Dated: (NOVEMBER 1978) Pages: 601-620

Futterman, M. & Minsberg, T. (2020, May 8). After a killing, “running while black” stirs even more anxiety. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/08/sports/Ahmaud-Arbery-running.html

Grinspoon, P. (2020, April 10). Medical marijuana. Harvard Health Publishing. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/medical-marijuana-2018011513085

National Center for Drug Abuse Statistics. (2019). Marijuana Incarceration Statistics. Retrieved July 17, 2020, from https://drugabusestatistics.org/marijuana-incarceration/

Organizational change through decision making and policy: A new procedural justice course for managers and supervisors. (n.d.). Retrieved January 2, 2024, from https://cops.usdoj.gov/html/dispatch/04-2015/a_new_procedural_justice_course.asp#:~:text=Procedural%20justice%20speaks%20to%20four,being%20impartial%20in%20decision%20making.

Wachtel, T. (2016). Defining Restorative. International Institute for Restorative Practices. https://www.nassauboces.org/cms/lib/NY01928409/Centricity/Domain/1699/Defining%20Restorative.pdf