Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
MASS INCARCERATION
IN NEW JERSEY
December 2017
INTRODUCTION
Envisioning an End to Mass Incarceration
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0 20
14
19
19 8
19 9
19 0
19 1
19 2
19 3
19 4
19 5
19 6
19 7
19 8
19 9
19 0
19 1
19 2
19 3
19 4
19 5
19 6
19 7
19 8
20 9
20 0
20 1
20 2
20 3
20 4
20 5
20 6
20 7
20 8
20 9
20 0
20 1
20 2
20
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
13
15
ACLU-NJ 1
100%
75%
60.5%
57.8%
50%
25% 23%
18.6%
16%
12.8%
8.8%
1%
0%
State Population Incarcerated Population
Source: The Sentencing Project
People of color disproportionately face the brunt states, New Jersey had the fourth-highest per-person
of mass incarceration. Nationally, Black people cost of imprisonment. And this did not include the
make up only about 13 percent of the population costs counties were bearing by keeping approxi-
but comprise about 40 percent of prisoners. In New mately 15,000 people statewide in jail each year.
Jersey, the racial disparities are even worse: about Yet there is hope.
60 percent of individuals incarcerated in New Jer- Following decades of punitive policies that have
sey are Black, while the states population was only sent millions to prison and devastated communities
about 15 percent Black in 2016. Although people of in every state, a national reevaluation of the criminal
color make up only about 44 percent of New Jerseys justice system has taken root. A growing number of
population, approximately 76.5 percent of prison- community, faith, and political leaders on the right
ers in New Jersey are people of color. The states and the left agree: the nations addiction to mass
Black and Latino residents are incarcerated at rates incarceration must end.
12.12 and 2.19 times higher, respectively, than that We must seize this historic opportunity to address
of white New Jerseyans, based on 2014 data from the unprecedented scope of the mass incarceration
The Sentencing Project. crisis. With this vision, the American Civil Liberties
In 2010, New Jersey taxpayers paid $54,865 per Union of New Jersey (ACLU-NJ) sets forth a plan
year for each person incarcerated in the states 13 to dramatically reduce New Jerseys incarcerated
prisons, adding up to more than $1.4 billion annually, population.
according to the Vera Institute of Justice. Among all As we advance policy proposals to curtail mass
The ACLU-NJs vision relies on several proposals. Some will have a direct, measurable effect on the
incarcerated population; others will be impossible to quantify. This document is not the result of a
study or rigorous academic analysis. It does not purport to stand up to rigorous academic analysis. The
ACLU-NJ candidly acknowledges that gains in one area will mitigate progress in others. For example, if
fewer people are jailed as a result of bail reform or the decriminalization of drug possession, there will
be fewer people able to benefit from improvements in the parole release system. Where numbers are
provided they represent optimistic estimations or reasoned aspirations rather than exact predictions.
Where possible, projections are based on academic studies and documented effects of reforms on prison
populations in New Jersey and in other states.
ACLU-NJ 3
VISION TO CUT MASS INCARCERATION
IN NEW JERSEY
The ACLU of New Jerseys Path to Dramatically Cut Our States
Prison and Jail Population
A multitude of root causes created mass incarceration, and only a multi-pronged approach can
address it. In 2015, there were 36,486 in New Jerseys prisons and jails. The ACLU of New Jersey has a
vision to cut that number significantly.
Rethinking Release
Fix the Parole System for State Prisons 1,400
Fix Parole for County Jails 400
Stop Imprisoning People for Technical Parole Violations 300
Compassionate Release 100
Expand Earned-Eligibility Credits 1,200
Expand Participation in Successful Re-entry Programs 100
Introduce More Robust Re-entry Programs 1,000
Establish Prisoner Cooperative Programs 200
REFORM of the criminal justice system is more than For years, New Jersey had a wealth-based bail
a moral imperative it also reduces wasteful and system rather than a risk-based one. In 2017, that
unnecessary incarceration. The following changes changed, and we are already beginning to see a re-
would lower the population in our prisons and jails duction in our county jail populations.
at the source: by limiting unnecessary interactions Under the previous system, although judges were
with the criminal justice system and by reducing the only supposed to consider the risk that a defendant
number of sentences that are inordinately severe. would not appear in court in setting money bail, the
setting of even small bail amounts for low-risk defen-
End Reliance on Pretrial dants kept poor people locked up, while wealthier
Detention defendants including ones who posed a greater
risk were released.
New Jerseys bail reform has already resulted In 2014, New Jersey dealt a major blow to mass in-
in smaller numbers of people awaiting trial in carceration through legislation and a constitutional
jail unnecessarily. amendment that overhauled our states bail system
and implemented meaningful speedy trial require-
Bail reform must be implemented fairly.
ments. The bail reform law took effect in 2017, and
# Detained:
3,082 (14.2%)
#Released
On Own
Recognizance
2,164 (10%)
Other (3.1%)
Among those who # Released on monitoring:
# of people eligible for bail couldnt pay, 1,547 15,831 (72.7%)
who waited in jail solely (11.9% of all NJ
because they couldnt pay: detainees) couldnt
5,006 (38.5%) afford $2,500 or less.
(Data collected from 19 of 21 county jails.) Source: Drug Policy Alliance.
ACLU-NJ 5
the ACLU-NJ is currently working with allies to en- 30 percent of the people charged with the more
sure it is implemented fairly and effectively. serious offenses are released on supervised con-
Before reforms were enacted, nearly 11,000 people ditions while awaiting trial.
awaited their trials in New Jersey jails people Those who remain in jail spend up to 40 per-
convicted of no crime but stuck behind bars be- cent less time there than they used to, because
cause they couldnt afford bail. The average length of speedy-trial protections included in pretrial
of a pretrial detention was close to 11 months. On justice reform.
any given day, more than 1,500 people were in jail These changes could result in a reduction of as
because they could not come up with $2,500 or less many as 8,500 people from our jail population.
in bail. This system of de facto debtors prisons cre-
ated vast disparities in the criminal justice system Eliminate Mandatory
between rich and poor defendants. Minimum Sentences
In just the first eight months of the reforms, New
Jersey has already seen significant positive chang- Mandatory minimums hamstring judges into
es: the number of people in jail awaiting trial has giving harsher sentences.
dropped from 7,173 at the beginning of 2017 to 6,006 Since their advent in the 70s, inflexible sen-
on August 31, 2017 (and there were reductions even tencing requirements have become extremely
before January 1, in anticipation of the implementa- widespread.
tion of bail reform).
But, in order to continue to drive down the number Mandatory minimum sentencing laws have played a
of people unfairly jailed, bail reform must be imple- major role in the growth of New Jerseys prison popu-
mented fairly. If we are able to ensure the following lation over the last four decades. Since the mid-1970s,
three conditions, New Jersey will see a tremendous Congress and state legislatures have implemented
reduction in its pretrial jail population: strict, inflexible sentencing laws that have led to a
95 percent of people charged with crimes other dramatic, unfair spike in the length of prison terms.
than the most serious ones are out of jail while In 1979, the New Jersey Legislature began to in-
awaiting trial. (Excluded from this group are stitute mandatory minimum sentences for certain
those charged with the most serious offenses: crimes. Since then, judges have had no choice but
violent offenses, weapons offenses, and sex of- to sentence individuals convicted of these crimes to
fenses.) prison for a minimum number of years. Those indi-
61% 74%
41%
11%
1982 1987 2002 2015
ACLU-NJ 7
decriminalized, fewer nonviolent offenders would policing. These enforcement strategies needlessly
be eligible for prison sentences, thus reducing the entagle people in our criminal justice system, and
impact of the recommendation imploring judges they disproportionately target people of color.
to consider the costs of sentencing. These arrests lead to jail time and longer criminal re-
cords, ultimately translating into longer sentences
Reduce Police Encounters all for relatively small offenses that divert re-
Through Decriminalization of sources from enforcement of more serious crimes.
Low-Level Offenses and Drug In 2015, New Jersey law enforcement made 302,856
Possession arrests. Only one in 10 was for a violent offense.
Police should not bear sole responsibility for man-
Law enforcement should not bear responsi-
aging community problems. Some of these behav-
bility for community problems better handled
iors would be more effectively resolved through
outside the criminal justice system.
other agencies, such as the Department of Human
Services.
Ending Arrests for Low-Level Offenses New Jersey makes thousands of arrests each year
The aggressive enforcement of low-level offenses for several kinds of low-level offenses, from dis-
the cornerstone of broken windows policing in- orderly conduct (12,988 in 2015) to loitering and
appropriately criminalizes tens of thousands of peo- curfew violations (1,416 in 2015) to prostitution
ple in New Jersey every year. Enforcement of these (806 in 2015).
offenses leads to unnecessary encounters between Chief among these low-level offenses is marijua-
police and community members, compounded by na possession. Between 1990 and 2015, New Jersey
aggressive stop-and-frisk practices and quota-based law enforcement agencies made more than 470,000
26500
23000
Marijuana
19500 Possession
Arrests
16000
Other
Marijuana
Arrests
12500
9000 20 20
11 12
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
19
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
13
14
15
Marijuana arrests continue to rise. In 2015, New Jersey made the most marijuana possession arrests on record
with 2013 and 2014 coming in second and third, respectively.
ACLU-NJ 9
mended in this document, the baseline number
for the 10 percent reduction in incarceration as
the result of a minimum wage increase would
decrease. Nonetheless, increases in the minimum
wage could meaningfully decrease the size of the
incarcerated population while improving the lives
of the many New Jerseyans earning the minimum
wage, currently $8.44 per hour. Suffice it to say
that in New Jersey, where the cost of living is
so high, a ten percent increase in the minimum
wage does not provide a living wage. We have
called on New Jersey to raise the minimum wage
to $15, an amount that begins to approach a liv-
ing wage.
ALLOWING incarcerated people to transition out and seek support from their own communities.
of confinement and re-enter society is essential to Parole boards that groundlessly deny parole vio-
shrinking the current incarcerated population. Our late constitutional guarantees of due process and
sentencing policies often mandate extremely harsh equal protection. The pervasive racial disparities
prison sentences disproportionate to the crime com- in the criminal justice system also mean that deni-
mitted, which more deeply entrenches people in the als of parole disproportionately affect families and
criminal justice system. Even with recent improve- communities of color.
ments, many people imprisoned in New Jersey lack The number of times parole has been granted has
the support or education to succeed when back in declined sharply and steadily. Between 2002 and
society. Fixing these deficiencies would lead to a sys- 2008, an average of 7,747 people were released from
tem that stops people from spending more time in- prison on parole every year. In 2015, only 3,011 peo-
carcerated than they need, and it would better equip ple were paroled. Several factors are at play, includ-
people, post-incarceration, to lead lives that do not ing a decrease in the number of people eligible for
enmesh them in the criminal justice system again. parole. Still, the parole rate in 2015, 34.4 percent, is
significantly lower than the rate just a decade and
Fix the Parole a half earlier, at 49.8 percent in 2000. If New Jersey
Release System returns to the 2000-era parole rate, about 1,350 fewer
Parole is granted at a significantly lower rate people could be incarcerated.
compared to previous decades. The same severe trend exists in county jails. The
The parole board denies parole groundlessly State Parole Board decides which people in the
and without any requirement to give an expla- states county jails sentenced to terms of less than
nation. 365 days should be released on parole. At the peak
Parole can be too easily revoked for small, in 2009, people in county jails were paroled at a rate
non-criminal violations of parole. of 59.1 percent. Today that rate is only 43 percent.
A return to the earlier rate could mean about 450
Parole is a process that enables people to be re- fewer incarcerated people in New Jersey.
leased from prison before the end of their sentence. Once out on parole, people who violate their
The states sharp decline in the use of parole has parole can be returned to jail. Violations take two
contributed to mass incarceration in New Jersey. forms: an arrest for a new offense or a violation of
Accordingly, parole is an important part of reforming a parole condition that is not itself criminal, such
our corrections system. as being late for a meeting, failing to keep a job, or
Parole allows people to safely reintegrate into missing curfew. The latter type of violation is known
society and connect with resources that help them as a technical violation of parole.
develop the skills needed to secure education, em- In 2003, 70 percent of all parole-revocation hear-
ployment, and housing. Once released, parolees can ings resulted in revocation. Today, 85 percent do. If
reenter the workforce, reconnect with their families, we return to the 2003 rate, about 325 fewer people
ACLU-NJ 11
Parole Rates in NJ, 20002015
60%
State parole rate County parole rate
55%
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
could be incarcerated. Returning someone to jail adults are released early. Expanding this program
based on a technical violation of parole, such as to include early release for elderly individuals who
missing a meeting or doctors appointment, is a poor can demonstrate that they pose little risk would save
use of resources and can stymie individuals efforts money and help families. If 30 percent of incarcer-
to rebuild their lives after incarceration. This is es- ated senior citizens were released, there could be
pecially true for people with disabilities who may about 125 fewer people in our prisons.
need and are often not receiving reasonable mod- This report notes that if reforms discussed ear-
ifications to successfully comply with conditions of lier reducing the number of people who are serv-
their parole. ing sentences in jails and prisons by raising the
Finally, denying the release of elderly people who minimum wage, decriminalizing low-level offens-
are no longer considered dangerous defies public es, and ensuring that judges consider the costs of
safety, financial sense, and compassion for seniors sentencing were put in place, the overall number
and their families. Older people pose fewer disci- of people incarcerated would decline, thus reducing
plinary problems during their incarceration and re- the impact of projections for this section concern-
offend at lower rates upon release. The significant ing parole.
medical needs of elderly individuals make them an
extraordinarily costly group to house, and prisons Expand Earned Eligibility for
and jails are simply not equipped to handle the com- Good-Time and Merit-Time
plexities involved in caring for aging adults. Programs
New Jersey already allows for compassionate re- Other states have more generous and sensible
lease, also called medical parole, but few elderly policies for commuting time from a sentence.
ACLU-NJ 13
eratives offer the prospect of much-needed skills
for future employment and help ease the financial
burdens of fines and restitution often associated
with incarceration. Cooperatives in Italy and the
United Kingdom have seen recidivism rates as low
as 5 percent and 2 percent, respectively. If New
Jersey implemented cooperatives at each of its 13
corrections facilities to facilitate re-entry, with just
100 participants at each facility, New Jersey could
potentially decrease its incarcerated population by
up to 225 people.
IF fully realized, these eight steps could account for which applies exclusively to people who are con-
up to 19,750 fewer incarcerated people in New Jersey. victed of a crime.
The system of mass incarceration comprises in- For another example, the recommendation that
terrelated elements, which means some reforms judges consider the costs of sentencing pertains
would affect the reach of others. But while the sys- only to nonviolent offenses, while the recommen-
tem is interrelated, it is also vast. Though some is- dation to raise the minimum wage would also relate
sues would overlap, many elements of this plan are to decreases in violent crime.
distinct from each other and would not be affected While we cannot control for the possibility that
by other reforms. one reform may prevent someones incarceration
For example, the bail reform number includes altogether, the breadth of the proposals would give
only defendants who would not be in jail pending each reform its own independent impact. Each step
trial, making it completely independent from a re- in its own right is an important component of sys-
form like the elimination of mandatory minimums, tem-wide reform.
ACLU-NJ 15
SUPPORTING REFORMS
Bringing Systemic Changes Within Sight
THE eight main reforms in this plan, if implemented, in New Jersey, but it would make the criminal justice
could signifcantly reduce the number of New Jersey- system smarter and fairer.
ans in prisons and jails. Rather than a prescriptive
policy proposal, this vision for ending mass incar- Parole Board Composition
ceration is a far-reaching sketch of what a fairer Reform
criminal justice system could look like. The parole board needs accountability and
Alongside those eight proposals, other key reforms members with expertise and experience in
could result in meaningful reductions, although they criminal justice.
defy similar kinds of quantification. When approach-
ing criminal justice reform, it is important to ac- New Jerseys parole board consists of a chairman, 14
knowledge all of the moving parts of the system and associate members, and three alternates, all appoint-
the ways that each part contributes to the over-in- ed by the governor with the advice and consent of
carceration of New Jerseys residents. the Senate for terms of six years. For their full-time
service on the parole board, they earn more than
Pretrial $115,000 per year. The members are supposed to
Intervention be qualified, with training or experience in law, so-
Pretrial intervention lets people charged with ciology, criminal justice, juvenile justice, or similar
low-level offenses avoid prison. We need more. fields that would give special insight into the justice
system. Yet we know that not all nominees for the
In 2016 in New Jersey, 9,998 people, mostly first- board have uniformly met that broad standard.
time offenders charged with third- and fourth-de- Advocates harbor concerns that when it comes to
gree offenses, applied to the Pretrial Intervention nominations, politics outweigh experience. As the
program (PTI). In this program, people charged with Asbury Park Press editorial board has described
lower-level offenses can avoid incarceration and ul- it, the parole board has a reputation as a longtime
timately have their records expunged if they comply dumping ground for political hacks. In one notori-
with conditions set by the court. ous case, a local official who lacked both a college
Of those PTI applicants, 5,314 were accepted into degree and any significant experience in criminal
the program. While those who were not accepted justice was nominated twice.
likely received probation rather than a prison sen- As described earlier, the rate of people released
tence, they were nonetheless under correctional on parole has declined drastically over the past sev-
supervision and saddled with a criminal record. eral years. While the reasons vary, it is critical that
Because the collateral consequences of a criminal parole board members have sufficient and diverse
conviction alone can hinder efforts to find a job or experience with the criminal justice system and that
place to live, people diverted into PTI are often bet- political influence is minimized. Knowing that we
ter positioned to succeed. Creating mechanisms for cannot fully insulate parole board members from
more admissions to PTI may not have an immediate, political influence, we recommend the parole board
direct impact on the number of people incarcerated statute be amended to require at least the following:
ACLU-NJ 17
should be required to screen cases to assess the These funds were used to improve the quality of
merits and strength of the evidence prior to charging services in prisons and re-entry programs, and they
decisions in certain cases, if not all. paid for technological improvements at the agencies
To further improve prosecutorial practices, the that administer criminal justice across the state.
Office of the Attorney General should create civil- In New Jersey, the closure of Riverfront State
ian task forces to oversee prosecutors offices and Prison in 2009 saved the state an estimated $40
develop written policies mandating training, super- million-plus per year. The closing of the Gloucester
vision, and discipline to prevent prosecutorial error. County Jail in 2013 saved that county over $10 mil-
When appointing prosecutors, the governor should lion. If New Jerseys lawmakers were to require the
consider a persons commitment to ending mass reinvestment of a portion of the cost savings from
incarceration. More reporting of prosecutorial mis- state- and county-level criminal justice reforms,
conduct would also improve practices. All instanc- many of the proposed reforms could be fully fund-
es of prosecutorial error should be reported to the ed and implemented with no additional legislative
Office of the Attorney General, and district ethics appropriation. While reforms such as decriminaliz-
boards should be notified when errors contribute ing low-level offenses and instituting prosecutorial
to reversals, result in mistrials, or significantly prej reform do not have direct costs of implementation,
udice defendants. reforms such as the expansion and improvement of
re-entry programs and the collection of more com-
Legislation Requiring prehensive and reliable criminal justice data can
Reinvestment of Criminal come with high costs.
Justice Cost Savings Even modest requirements to reinvest cost sav-
Addressing the harms of mass incarceration ings from facility closures would provide signif-
demands robust re-investment in the affected icant resources to invest in the success of New
communities. Jerseys incarcerated and formerly incarcerated
population.
Reductions in New Jerseys incarcerated population
come with significant cost savings. However, crim-
inal justice reform is not free. These cost savings
represent a remarkable opportunity for reinvest-
ment in the criminal justice system to implement
reforms and improve conditions and services. These
cost savings also present a critical opportunity for
investment in the many communities across New
Jersey that have been devastated by decades of mass
incarceration.
In 2012, Pennsylvania passed a law requiring a
portion of the cost savings that resulted from crim
inal justice reform to be reinvested into building a
smarter, more efficient, and more humane criminal
justice system. Over a period of four years, Penn-
sylvania saw a decrease in its incarcerated popula-
tion by 1,800 people, and more than $13 million was
earmarked to improve the criminal justice system.
Transparency and data collection help us avoid sitions. Such data must be aggregated by date,
mistakes similar to those responsible for mass location, race, ethnicity, gender, age, limited En-
incarceration. glish proficiency, and the reasons for enforcement
To end New Jerseys racial disparities, we must activity.
first create an accurate snapshot using data. Correctional facilities must collect aggregate
data regarding incarcerated populations, includ-
REQUIRING robust data collection and transpar ing the average daily population, length of stay,
ency is the easiest single step to ensure a fairer and total bookings, and net bookings, which excludes
more equitable criminal justice system. Standardized people who are booked and released. Net book-
data collection will provide policymakers, advocates, ing data should be aggregated by the reason for
researchers, and members of the public with the best incarceration (e.g., indictable offenses, disorderly
depiction of the current state of affairs. It will also persons charges, traffic offenses, holds, and de-
enable New Jersey to develop evidence-based re- tainers), the stage of adjudication (e.g., pretrial,
forms, rather than fear-based policies. Public access post-trial, hold, or detainer), and demographics
to criminal justice data is critical to ensuring that (e.g., race, ethnicity, and gender).
the government remains accountable to the public
it serves. Correctional facilities must collect individual-
The state of collection, maintenance, and public level data regarding profiles of incarcerated peo-
reporting in New Jersey regarding the criminal justice ple, including primary custody status (e.g., pre-
system is abysmal. Indeed, the greatest challenge in trial, post-trial, sentenced, or subject to a hold),
creating this report was the lack of data at each stage charge status (e.g., indictable crime, disorderly
of the criminal justice process. persons offense, municipal ordinance violation,
The Legislature should mandate uniform, standard- violation of probation, or parole violation), spe-
ized data collection and aggregation at all critical cial charges, date of birth, ethnicity, education,
points in the criminal justice process, making that residence, disability and health status, and re-
information available in an electronic format that lease status.
outside researchers can manipulate. In identifying Correctional facilities must collect data regarding
and developing collection and reporting systems, the facility operations, including:
Legislature should create task forces that include
Use-of-force incidents, internal affairs com-
relevant criminal justice policymakers and adminis-
plaints and dispositions, searches, and con-
trators, researchers and academics, advocates, and,
traband found.
crucially, individuals who have experienced arrest, in-
carceration, parole, probation, and re-entry services. Activities provided, including types and num-
At a minimum, we recommend the following: ber of participants.
Police departments must collect data on stops, Crimes and incidents within the facility, in-
searches, arrests, summonses, officers use of cluding the incident type, type of action tak-
force, and internal affairs complaints and dispo- en, and any resulting disciplinary hearings.
ACLU-NJ 19
Breakdown of population by classification public defender, or pro se).
status (e.g., general population, administra Imposition of fines and fees and the dispo
tive segregation, or protective custody). sition of collected money (e.g., restitution,
Grievances filed, documenting information money paid to dedicated funds, money paid
such as type, finding, and resolution. to discretionary funds).
Medical and mental health care provided, in- The type of release granted. Further, judg
cluding the number of incarcerated people ments of both conviction and acquittal in
with chronic health or mental health problems, criminal proceedings should explicitly cap
number of people sent to hospitals, and num- ture a defendants race and gender.
ber of people who experienced mental health The parole board must collect data, aggregated
emergencies or were placed on suicide watch. by race and gender, regarding parole statistics for
Correctional facilities must collect data regarding each offense, reflecting:
personnel, including: The number of hearings scheduled, and
Personnel categories, such as correctional whether they were initial, two-member,
staff, medical staff, non-medical program three-member, full-board, or administrative
services staff, social workers, or building reviews.
maintenance. The number of hearings conducted, and
Personnel demographics, including race, eth- whether they were initial, two-member,
nicity, and gender. three-member, full-board, or administrative
Complaints filed against employees by in- reviews.
carcerated people or other members of the The number of times parole was granted or
staff and investigations of disciplinary in- denied.
fractions, such as abuse, neglect, injury, theft, Parole revocation statistics, including the
or harassment. number of hearings scheduled and conducted,
Leave information, including medical, fami- as well as the number of hearings leading to
ly, suspension, or workers compensation, as parole revocations and parole continuations.
well as duration. Re-entry service providers must collect data re-
Courts must collect criminal justice data, includ- garding participant demographics, including:
ing: Race, ethnicity, gender, age, limited English
Demographic information, and in particular proficiency, length of sentence, and the
tracking the race and gender that correspond charge that resulted in incarceration.
with defendants who are convicted, acquit- Participant success numbers, including em-
ted, or admitted to diversionary programs. ployment rates and educational attainment.
The basis for arrests and incarceration, the Information about participant lapses, includ-
number of warrants executed for failure to ing arrests, convictions, and re-incarceration.
pay debts and failure to appear in court, and
New Jersey must mandate standardized online
the number of people incarcerated for each
reporting requirements to ensure that the pub-
offense, including parole violations.
lic has easy access to basic transparency data
Sentence length. without having to file costly and often-demanding
Type of representation (e.g., private attorney, records requests.
WHILE it is impossible to predict with complete should not have to brace themselves in fear of the
precision the number of people who would be di- increased odds that they will be criminalized not
verted from the criminal justice system by some of because of their actions, but because they are the
these reforms, these changes would contribute to ones whose communities are imperiled by aggres-
reducing the number of people who are incarcer- sive policing. They are the ones who suffer when
ated. As a case in point, New Jerseys monumental prosecutors operate on the motivation to convict at
bail reform law has already made a dramatic impact all costs. They are the ones whose families grieve
in reducing mass incarceration. Moreover, these re- because of unjust sentencing schemes and illusory
forms are essential to making the system smarter opportunities for parole.
and fairer. In places that have decreased mass incarcera-
The fact that the land of the free is also the home tion, crime rates have not risen. Indeed, they have
of the worlds largest imprisoned population has dropped. In New York, California, and here in New
become common knowledge. In one of the most Jersey, the incarcerated population decreased about
politically fractured eras in American history, re- 25 percent between 1999 and 2012. All three states
duction of mass incarceration is the rare issue that saw a decrease in crime rates that exceeded the av-
enjoys bipartisan support. erage drop nationally, according to The Sentencing
The sheer scale of injustice in our legal system Project.
makes it difficult to see beyond the truism that the This vision establishes a start but just a start to
current system is untenable and must be replaced. clearing the fallout of a criminal justice system that,
An urgent question remains: once a broken justice for as long as it has existed, has actively devalued
system comes down, what appears in its place? people of color. There is no guarantee that these rec-
Without reinvestment in communities devas- ommendations will succeed in reducing the number
tated by mass arrest, prosecution, and incar- of people incarcerated or the gross racial disparities
ceration, any plan to reform the justice system that plague our criminal justice system.
is fated to perpetuate the same cruelties, racial But we do have reason to believe that these re-
disparities, and failures. forms would lower the number of people behind
This proposal amounts to far more than the sum of bars in our state.
its parts. It represents a shift in the power we allow Regardless of the numbers, these changes would
our government to exert over our neighbors and fel- add more humanity to our gratuitously cruel penal
low New Jerseyans. It puts forward the notion that system. To do nothing is to tolerate a rotten system,
people of color, and people in poor communities, and that is unacceptable.
ACLU-NJ 21
Acknowledgments
This vision has been a collaborative project, conceived of, written, researched, edited, and produced by
present and former ACLU of New Jersey staff members including Portia Allen-Kyle, Edward Barocas, Iris
Bromberg, Jasmine Crenshaw, Diane DuBrule, Dianna Houenou, Elyla Huertas, Tracey Kelley, Rebecca
Livengood, Jeanne LoCicero, Andrea Long, Eric McKinley, Udi Ofer, Allison Peltzman, Keerthi Potluri,
Alicia Rogers, Ari Rosmarin, Alexander Shalom, Amol Sinha, and Alexi Velez.
The data relied upon in this document comes from public sources including the State of New Jersey, the
U.S. Census Bureau, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Drug Policy Alliance, and The Sentencing Project.
More detailed notes are available upon request. Where possible, the projections are based on documented
effects of criminal justice reform policies on prison populations and the criminal justice landscape before
those policies were put in place, both in New Jersey and other states.
The ACLU-NJ is grateful for the ongoing support of the ACLUs Campaign for Smart Justice, the Fund for
New Jersey, and other generous donors. Graphic design was executed by Kerstin Vogdes Diehn, KV Design.