The Federal criminal sentencing guidelines struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 required that males and females who commit the same crime and have the same prior criminal record be sentenced equally. Using data obtained from the United States Sentencing Commission’s records, we examine whether there exists any gender-based bias in criminal sentencing decisions. We treat months in prison as a censored variable in order to account for the frequent outcome of no prison time. Additionally, we control for the self-selection of the defendant into guilty pleas through use of an endogenous switching regression model. A new decomposition methodology is employed. Our results indicate that women receive more lenient sentences even after controlling for circumstances such as the severity of the offense and past criminal history.
Source: “Do You Receive a Lighter Prison Sentence Because You Are a Woman? An Economic Analysis of Federal Criminal Sentencing Guidelines” from IZA Discussion Paper No. 2870, June 2007
It’s not pro-woman bias on the part of female judges that causes this, it’s the paternalism of male judges:
Studies of federal prison sentences consistently find unexplained racial and gender disparities in the length of sentence and in the probability of receiving jail time and departures from the Sentencing Guidelines. These disparities disfavor blacks, Hispanics, and men. A problem with interpreting these studies is that the source of the disparities remains unidentified. The gravest concern is that sentencing disparities are the result of prejudice, but other explanations have not been ruled out. For example, wealth and quality of legal counsel are poorly controlled for and are undoubtedly correlated with race. This paper uses the political, racial, and gender composition of the district court bench to estimate the effect of judicial demographics on sentencing and on observed racial and gender disparities. The evidence presented here suggests that judicial demographics have little influence on prison sentences in general, but do impact racial and gender disparities. The findings regarding gender in the case of serious offenses are quite striking: the greater the proportion of female judges in a district, the lower the gender disparity for that district. I interpret this as evidence of a paternalistic bias among male judges that favors women. The racial composition of the bench has mixed effects that are open to different interpretations. The race and gender results suggest, however, that a judge’s background affects his or her sentencing decisions. Finally, there is little evidence that the political composition of the district affects sentencing disparities.
Source: “Racial and Gender Disparities in Prison Sentences: The Effect of District-Level Judicial Demographics” from Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 57-92, January 2005
You can also subscribe via Twitter, email, or RSS. Check out the site’s most popular posts of all time.
Great nonfiction crime books are “Low Life”, “Homicide”, and Codes of the Underworld: How Criminals Communicate.
You just committed murder. What should you do now?
Are attractive people less likely to be convicted of a crime and more likely to get a shorter sentence?
Does the male/female wage gap extend to crime?
When does the sex of a judge affect their rulings?
Are lawyers any good at predicting the outcomes of their cases?
Can watching TV crime dramas distort perception of the criminal justice system?
Why you should only reference low numbers when you’re on trial for murder:
Does it work when a defendant tries to excuse away crimes by saying he was abused as a child?
How would the law punish Siamese twins if one committed murder without the other being involved?
I want to subscribe!