New York Times Ad Absurdum
In "The Crime of Punishment," the editorial writers of the New York Times urge the Supreme Court to uphold a lower court's remedy for overcrowding, and inadequate medical treatment, in California prisons.
Finding that overcrowding represented the "primary cause" of inadequate medical care for inmates, a lower court last year ordered California to reduce the prison population of about 160,000 by some 30 percent--a court, that is, told the state to release some 48,000 prisoners. California appealed this ruling, and the matter has now come before the high court in Schwarzenegger v. Plata.
In urging the Supreme Court to uphold the lower court's ruling, the New York Times says--what? That the conditions in California prisons are really bad. Really really bad, and they mean it.
Today, there are almost twice as many inmates in California’s 33 prisons as they were designed for. The court ordered the state to reduce that population by around 30 percent. While still leaving it overcrowded, that would free up space, staff and other vital resources for long overdue medical and mental health clinics....
Among experts, as a forthcoming issue of the journal Criminology & Public Policy relates, there is a growing belief that less prison and more and better policing will reduce crime. There is almost unanimous condemnation of California-style mass incarceration, which has led to no reduction in serious crime and has turned many inmates into habitual criminals.
For all I know, every word of that is true. (I doubt it, but maybe.) What's still striking about this editorial--striking? No, astounding--is that it urges a decision on the Supreme Court on purely policy grounds. Nowhere does the editorial mention the Constitution. Nowhere does it adduce so much as a single sentence of legal reasoning.
This is liberal thinking, exposing itself in a ponderous and self-righteous but nevertheless wonderfully pure and unselfconscious reductio ad absurdum. To the New York Times, the Supreme Court is solely a policy-making body. Law? The Constitution? Precedent? Don't be...absurd.
- Comment (26)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
The California correction officer's union is one of the most powerful in the state.
California prison guards earn twice the national average. And that's before overtime: Last year, 391 guards earned more than $100,000 in cash compensation, with the biggest earner raking in $154,351.
But, then, if the New York Times were to publish those facts instead of advocating the release of 48,000 victims of society, it wouldn't be the New York Times.
Jul '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Uh-oh.
I think I hear Aaron coming.....
May '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
What is "better policing" supposed to mean? Since they divorce the concept from punishment, I can only assume they want gargoyles on every street corner.
But, as I said somewhere before, we're fools to use prison and fines as our only means of punishment. It makes more sense, and is more humane, to cane someone than to lock him in a concrete cage and feed him for twenty years.
I'm not going to say it anymore. They know.
Jul '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Aaron Miller: What is "better policing" supposed to mean? Since they divorce the concept from punishment, I can only assume they want gargoyles on every street corner.
But, as I said somewhere before, we're fools to use prison and fines as our only means of punishment. It makes more sense, and is more humane, to cane someone than to lock him in a concrete cage and feed him for twenty years.
I'm not going to say it anymore. They know. · Dec 6 at 1:59pm
Caning? What a wuss. I'm for summary capital punishment for any offense more egregious than littering. And make the malefactor's family pay for the bullet.
May '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Hasn't City Journal spent the last two decades debunking the "less prisoners, less crime" assumption?
Nov '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Here is an idea:
Gather up all the illegals in California's prisons, bus them back into Mexico — deep into Mexico — and unload them in Mexico City proper. Adios, amigos.
That will reduce the CA prison population by a lot more than thirty percent, I betcha.
Kenneth
Aaron Miller:
Caning? What a wuss. I'm for summary capital punishment for any offense more egregious than littering. And make the malefactor's family pay for the bullet.
I think I am in love...
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
While I do think the US has far too many people locked up (and privately run prisons scare me enough to make me want to grab my musket and start the next revolution) I must agree with Peter here.
The Court system lacks legal authority (or should lack it - I'm sure they will take it) to reduce a jail sentence for a political policy reason.
Legally, the appeal should be to the Governor to give clemency; not the Court.
Jul '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Peter, what is your problem?
I'm almost certain that no one in those California Prisons committed any Serious Crimes; Such as Being Republican, or Denying Global Warming.
So why should they be treated badly by the State?
Nov '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
I don't mind terribly when simpleton newspaper editors choose to ignore law for the sake of policy. I grow extremely concerned when justices do it.
Nov '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Kenneth
Aaron Miller: What is "better policing" supposed to mean? Since they divorce the concept from punishment, I can only assume they want gargoyles on every street corner.
But, as I said somewhere before, we're fools to use prison and fines as our only means of punishment. It makes more sense, and is more humane, to cane someone than to lock him in a concrete cage and feed him for twenty years.
I'm not going to say it anymore. They know. · Dec 6 at 1:59pm
Caning? What a wuss. I'm for summary capital punishment for any offense more egregious than littering. And make the malefactor's family pay for the bullet. · Dec 6 at 2:13pm
What a positively Soviet idea. Bad, bad.
Jul '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
If letting 30% out would still leave the prisons "overcrowded," then why stop at 30%? From where did the arbitrary number 30 come?
And who is going to determine which ones are part of that 30%?
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Aaron Miller:
I'm not going to say it anymore. They know. · Dec 6 at 1:59pm
Kind of you, Aaron. And, yes, I do know.
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
What does "Mass Incarceration" mean, aside from "putting in prison everyone sentenced to prison"? It probably means the Hobbesian horror of putting someone in prison for stealing his 47th car, instead of waiting until he shows his true colors and hot-wires #50.
Dec '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Lady Kurobara: Here is an idea:
Gather up all the illegals in California's prisons, bus them back into Mexico — deep into Mexico — and unload them in Mexico City proper. Adios, amigos. · Dec 6 at 2:34pm
That, but also give every convicted released prematurely due to the court's action a one-way bus ticket to New York City. Let the New York Times editors live with these tragic cases and see how much empathy they can muster when these unfortunates are working the streets around the Times headquarters. Maybe the editors can find it in their hearts to open their homes to these miscreants (or maybe the miscreants will take it upon themselves to do the opening).
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
My problem is more along the lines of a Judge putting a pothead in jail while announcing the sentence with scotch on his breath.
Nov '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
California has a long history of fiscal decisions aimed at providing social justice, and those decisions are coming home to roost in a way that will not just mean higher taxes and longer lines at the DMV, but death and destruction. Conservatives have always warned that this was how the pavement would end on that road, but were dismissed as alarmists.
I spent a career in the presence of federal, state, and county prisoners, and helped create the status of several of them. Prison works--not always, not perfectly--but it works. The mushy, nebulous methodologies that yield evidence to the contrary are wrong, and I am not impressed by the source of such conclusions.
Examples of patently stupid beliefs by supposed experts in the field of criminal justice are rife, but I'm always reminded of the "Lakewood Experiment" from the 70's. The Lakewood, Colorado, P.D. dressed their officers in slacks and blazers, and did away with the traditional rank structure, with the belief, fully supported by expert research, that it would remove that intimidating, authoritarian image of police, thus making the public trust and like them more.
Anyone want to guess how that went?
May '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
Again with the NYT.
That said, maybe the NYT editorial writers can help the prison overcrowding conditions by taking a couple deserving inmates home to stay with them.
Sep '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
I must admit that to my ears Mass Incarceration sounds like a round up of Catholics who bolt from Mass early.
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
What is perhaps most striking about the California prison controversy is the frequently asserted notion that we "put too many people in prison." If this reflects a valid point, it's a valid point artlessly rendered.
I'm unaware of a Platonic ideal for incarceration rates and wouldn't know how to deduce it if it existed. How many people we put in prison is a function of how many people are committing crimes. We can argue about what should or shouldn't be illegal, but having a conversation about numbers in a vacuum seems counterproductive.
For context, by the way, the National Institute of Corrections put the 2009 national average annual cost of incarceration at $29,689 per prisoner. In California, the number was $45,045.
Nov '10
Re: New York Times Ad Absurdum
The Times are really showing their ignorance here, I think. It is true that simply throwing people in jail for long periods of time increases the likelihood those inmates will offend again once they are released. And, several states are having success with greater use of shock probation, intense drug treatment, etc., but simply letting people loose for budgetary purposes is ridiculous.
And, as has been said, it should be the governor and legislators who decide how to solve the prison problem, not the courts.
I wonder what Dahlia Lithwick would have to say about this...
Edited on Dec 6, 2010 at 9:48pm