Free at Last? Judicial Discretion and Racial Disparities in Federal Sentencing
MetadataShow full item record
CitationCrystal S. Yang, Free at Last? Judicial Discretion and Racial Disparities in Federal Sentencing (June 2013).
AbstractThe Federal Sentencing Guidelines were created to reduce unwarranted sentencing disparities among similar defendants. This paper explores the impact of increased judicial discretion on racial disparities in sentencing after the Guidelines were struck down in United States v. Booker (2005). Using data on the universe of federal defendants, I find that black defendants are sentenced to almost two months more in prison compared to their white counterparts after Booker, a 4% increase in average sentence length. To identify the sources of racial disparities, I construct a dataset linking judges to over 400,000 defendants. Exploiting the random assignment of cases to judges, I find that racial disparities are greater among judges appointed after Booker, suggesting acculturation to the Guidelines by judges with experience sentencing under a mandatory regime. Prosecutors also respond to increased judicial discretion by charging black defendants with longer mandatory minimums.
Citable link to this pagehttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:10985166
- HLS Student Papers