Kevin Buckler

PERCEPTIONS OF INJUSTICE REVISITED: A TEST OF HAGAN ET AL.'S COMPARATIVE CONFLICT THEORY

ABSTRACT Building on traditional conflict perspectives, Hagan et al. (2005) have developed an important model for explaining racial-ethnic differences in perceptions of injustice, especially among Whites, Hispanics, and African Americans. Using data from the 2000 Public Opinion on the Courts in the United States survey, we provide a partial test of core propositions of their “comparative conflict theory.” Consistent with the perspectives “racial-ethnic divide thesis,” Whites perceived less injustice than members of minority groups. The findings also provide support for the “gradient thesis,” which predicts that African Americans perceive the most injustice, followed by Hispanics and Whites, respectively. In our sample, however, we found no evidence for the “differential sensitivity thesis,” which predicts that compared to African Americans, Hispanics’ perceptions of injustice will be differentially increased by contact with the justice system. We discuss the implications of our findings in the context of comparative conflict theory.

Support for the Death Penalty in Developing Democracies: A Binational Comparative Case Study

To assess support for the death penalty in Mexico and South Korea, surveys were administered to students at institutions of higher education. The majority of respondents in Mexico (52.3%) and South Korea (60.8%) supported the death penalty. Given that the Mexican and South Korean governments have histories of using criminal justice agencies to suppress democratic reform, the high level of support for the death penalty indicates that a history of authoritarian governance may not inculcate widespread opposition to the punishment. Concomitantly, regression analyses of the data indicate that beliefs about the treatment afforded to criminal suspects do not significantly affect support for capital punishment. Contrary to research conducted in the United States, which has consistently shown support for capital punishment is lower among females than among males, regression analyses of the data show that gender has no impact on support for the death penalty; findings that call for a reexamination of the thesis that the gender gap in support for the death penalty in the United States is the result of a patriarchal social structure.

U.S. Supreme Court Decisions in Fourth Amendment Cases (1961–2009) A Test of the Legal Subculture, Democratic Subculture, Negotiation/Synthesis, Resource Capability, and Social Background Hypotheses

This study explores the capacity of several different theoretical perspectives to account for variation in U.S. Supreme Court Fourth Amendment decisions (whether the case outcome favored the government or the individual). The study developed measures of Richardson and Vines and Crow and Gertz commentary on legal subculture and democratic subculture concerns of the judiciary as well as negotiation/synthesis of these concerns. The study also developed and tested measures of the resource capability thesis of Galanter and the recent work of George applying social background theory to the behavior of U.S. Supreme Court justices. The findings reveal support for each of these theoretical perspectives. Implications are discussed.

Racial and Ethnic Perceptions of Injustice: Does Prior Personal and Vicarious Incarceration Experience Alter the Racial/Ethnic Gap in Perceptions of Injustice?

The study tests the explicit and implicit racial/ethnic divide, gradient, and justice system contact propositions of comparative conflict theory and explores whether prior incarceration experience (personal and vicarious) alters the observed relationship between race/ethnicity and perceptions of injustice. The study uses data from the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, the Washington Post, and Harvard University 2006 survey concerning issues relating to African American males. The study found support for the racial/ethnic divide, gradient, and justice system contact hypotheses. The study also found support for the notion that prior incarceration experience intensifies the relationship between race/ethnicity and perceptions of injustice. The gap between African Americans and Whites in perceptions of injustice is more pronounced among persons with prior incarceration experience. The gap in perception of injustice between Whites and Hispanics was also stronger among those with prior incarceration experiences. The gap between African Americans and Hispanics was not impacted by prior incarceration experience. Future research should continue to explore the potential for prior incarceration experience to impact the relationship between race/ethnicity and perceptions of injustice.

PUBLIC OPINION ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION: A TEST OF SEVEN CORE HYPOTHESES

ABSTRACT Recently, the United States has witnessed massive numbers of illegal immigrants who have entered the country. As a result, illegal immigration issues have begun to enter the political arena as a substantive policy concern for national and state legislators. The issue of illegal immigration has also emerged as a policy concern for practitioners in the criminal justice system as legislators have increasingly attempted to further criminalize illegal immigration and use criminal justice resources to respond to these concerns. Thus, public opinion toward controlling illegal immigration and illegal immigrants has become or substantive interests for policy-makers and practitioners. This research used the 2004 National Election Study data to test seven core hypotheses (the economic threat hypothesis; the culture threat hypothesis; the core American values hypothesis; the culture affinity hypothesis; the racial/ethnic affect hypothesis; the contact hypothesis; and the group threat hypothesis) concerning public opinion toward illegal immigration. The study found support for the economic threat hypothesis, the core American values hypothesis, the race/ethnic affect hypothesis, and the contact hypothesis. But the data also suggested that a more nuanced understanding of public opinion is needed that distinguishes between views about policy to control illegal immigration and affective evaluation of illegal immigrants as a population. Implications for the criminal justice system are discussed

Media, Crime and Crime Waves

The article proceeds by first establishing market model tendencies (over the public sphere model) as constraining factors that predominately dictate all news media decision making. The article then discusses a second constraining factor, the need to develop news content in an easy-to-use and easily understood format and structure, which leads media organizations to develop news themes. The result is a news selection process that facilitates the development of media-generated crime waves focusing typically on highly sensational crimes. The sporadic reporting of sensational crimes enables the development of moral panics.