Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Criminal justice reform sits at the intersection of constitutional law, civil liberties, and institutional power—concepts you'll see tested repeatedly in Courts Society. When you study these reforms, you're really examining how the justice system balances due process, equal protection, punishment theory, and judicial discretion. Each reform represents a response to systemic failures, and understanding the underlying problem helps you analyze why specific solutions have gained traction.
You're being tested on more than just what these reforms do—you need to understand which constitutional principles they invoke, what institutional tensions they create, and how they redistribute power among judges, prosecutors, police, and communities. Don't just memorize the reforms; know what concept each one illustrates and be ready to compare how different reforms address similar problems through different mechanisms.
These reforms address a fundamental tension in criminal justice: the balance between uniform standards and individualized justice. Mandatory sentencing removed judicial discretion to reduce disparities, but critics argue it created new inequities. Modern reforms aim to restore discretion while building in accountability.
Compare: Sentencing reform vs. bail reform—both address how socioeconomic status creates unequal outcomes, but sentencing reform operates post-conviction while bail reform affects the pretrial phase. If an FRQ asks about equal protection concerns in criminal procedure, bail reform is your strongest example of wealth-based discrimination.
These reforms reflect a philosophical shift from retributive justice (punishment for its own sake) to rehabilitative justice (addressing root causes of criminal behavior). They challenge the assumption that incarceration is the default response to lawbreaking.
Compare: Drug policy reform vs. prison reform—both prioritize treatment over punishment, but drug reform operates at the front end (preventing incarceration) while prison reform addresses those already in the system. Both reflect the rehabilitative model of justice.
These reforms respond to power imbalances within the justice system. When institutions lack oversight, misconduct goes unchecked. These measures create transparency mechanisms and independent review processes to hold powerful actors accountable.
Compare: Police accountability vs. wrongful conviction reforms—both create oversight mechanisms for institutional actors (police and prosecutors), but police reforms operate proactively while wrongful conviction reforms are reactive. Both address the problem of unchecked discretionary power.
These reforms confront the reality that the criminal justice system does not treat all people equally. Statistical evidence of racial disparities at every stage—from stops to sentencing—has driven reforms focused on data collection, policy change, and structural intervention.
Compare: Racial disparity reforms vs. juvenile justice reforms—both address how certain populations face systematically harsher treatment, but racial reforms focus on discriminatory practices while juvenile reforms recognize developmental differences. Both challenge the assumption that uniform treatment equals fair treatment.
Restorative justice represents a fundamental reconceptualization of what the justice system should accomplish. Rather than asking "what law was broken and what punishment is deserved?" it asks "what harm was caused and how can it be repaired?"
Compare: Restorative justice vs. traditional sentencing reform—both seek alternatives to incarceration, but sentencing reform works within the existing adversarial framework while restorative justice fundamentally reimagines the process. Restorative justice is your best example if asked about non-adversarial approaches to criminal law.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Equal protection / wealth discrimination | Bail reform, sentencing reform, racial disparity efforts |
| Rehabilitation vs. retribution | Drug policy reform, prison reform, reentry programs |
| Institutional accountability | Police accountability, wrongful conviction reforms |
| Judicial discretion | Sentencing reform, juvenile justice reform |
| Eighth Amendment concerns | Prison reform, juvenile justice reform |
| Community-based alternatives | Restorative justice, diversion programs, community policing |
| Data-driven policy | Racial disparity efforts, bail reform risk assessments |
| Constitutional rights of the accused | Wrongful conviction reforms, bail reform |
Which two reforms most directly address how socioeconomic status creates unequal treatment in the justice system, and at what stage of the process does each operate?
If an exam question asks you to compare retributive and rehabilitative approaches to justice, which three reforms best illustrate the rehabilitative model and why?
Both police accountability measures and wrongful conviction reforms create oversight mechanisms—what institutional actors does each target, and what constitutional concerns motivate each?
Compare and contrast how juvenile justice reform and racial disparity reduction efforts both challenge the idea that "equal treatment" means "fair treatment." What different arguments does each make?
An FRQ asks you to evaluate alternatives to incarceration. Which reforms provide examples, and how do they differ in their underlying philosophy about what justice should accomplish?