NCJ Number
195574
Journal
Criminal Justice Policy Review Volume: 13 Issue: 2 Dated: June 2002 Pages: 87-116
Editor(s)
Nanci Koser Wilson
Date Published
June 2002
Length
30 pages
Annotation
The article details the authors' arguments in favor of substantive equality and objective punishment with similar degrees of subjective consequnces.
Abstract
The article explores the utility of substantive equality principles in criminal justice sentencing. Presented in three parts, the article first provides a definition of substantive equality and an overview of the relationship between that theory and American legal traditions and feminist legal theory. The second portion presents the historic role of treatment in juvenile corrections. Finally, the authors offer suggestions for the implementation of substantive equality principles to the wider criminal justice system. The authors define substantive equality as an approach which provides equal outcomes within the penal law. Special emphasis was placed on reviews of the research of Ann Orloff and Joachim Salvelsberg. In addition to reviews of research, case studies are also presented to illustrate inequality within a system that does not use substantive equality principles. Different types of offenses are discussed including offenses categorized as civic, social, and criminal. In conclusion the authors assert that sentencing under substantive equality principles should be based on offense and needs, meaning that civic and social offenders would be handled differently than criminal offenders. The authors assert that this outcome would promote the interests of rehabilitation and justice. 23 notes, 85 references