Name:

Professor:

Course:

Date:

Barriers to Prosecutorial Reform

Prosecution plays a vital role in the criminal justice system. Prosecutors are meant to safeguard the public interest in the system, and in this pursuit, they propose appropriate punishment for criminal offenders. The prosecution has historically been known for a tough-on-crime stance which reassured the public that these supporters of public interest would make sure that those breaking the law faced punishment they deserve. This kind of thinking encouraged incarceration of low-level offenders with little accountability in the system. Over the past few years, the high incarceration levels in the country have come under scrutiny, and this kind of punishment has been proven to be ineffective. Mass incarceration also comes at a high financial and moral cost to society in general. These concerns have led to a different-minded prosecutorial system. New prosecutors want to focus on new goals such as fairness in punishment, reduced incarceration, and accountability among players in the system as well as more focus on the community (Richardson & Kutateladze 2). In the pursuit of these goals, prosecutors face several challenges including existing prosecutorial role orientations, deference to judges and focus on single case outcomes rather than the bigger picture.

In the past, the prosecutorial focus has been handing out harsh sentences as a way to deter crimes. This includes jail time and hefty bail and fines even for minor offences. This way of thinking has led to a breakdown in the criminal justice system where crime has been on the rise, and punishment does not result in any kind of reform among offenders. To counter this negative narratives around the prosecution and criminal justice system, a new breed of prosecutors have come up with the goal of improving outcomes from the system by focusing on fairness, community and accountability. Despite their best intentions, there are some barriers to such reforms.

The first barrier to prosecutorial reform is deference to judges. Based on their individual thinking, judges mete out punishment on offenders, and prosecutors often defer to judges’ wishes. A prosecutor has to tailor their decision to the judge’s preference. For example, when a judge is known to prefer jail time to community service, a prosecutor recommends jail term rather than arguing with the judge over a different form of punishment. After all, the judge makes the final decision in the case. A second barrier to prosecutorial reform is existing role orientations in the justice system (Richardson & Kutateladze 7). As a tradition, prosecutors have often sought incarceration as a form of punishment. This historical trend makes it difficult for reform-minded prosecutors to offer alternatives to jail time and prosecution. Another problem with the historical roles of prosecutors is that they are often seen as all-powerful, and the new idea of fairness does not augur well with old prosecutors and the system in general. The third challenge to prosecutorial reform is focus on individual cases over the bigger picture. To address issues such as racial profiling in the system, prosecutors have to look at trends while considering individual cases. However, for most prosecutors, the bigger picture comes at the cost of doing the right thing at the case level.

Works Cited

Richardson, Rebecca, and Besiki Luka Kutateladze. “Tempering expectations: A qualitative study of prosecutorial reform.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency (2020): 0022427820940739.