The prisoner reentry industry (PRI) emerged as a by-product of mass incarceration, with the stated purpose of helping the formerly incarcerated reenter society and achieve a new “law-abiding” status. Traditional criminological studies point to high recidivism rates in the United States as proof that U.S. reentry fails to rehabilitate offenders. Utilizing data from 57 in-depth semistructured interviews with formerly incarcerated individuals and 10 interviews with reentry service providers across five states, we posit that although the PRI purports to rehabilitate offenders, it operates using mechanisms including parole conditions and fee-based reentry services that ensure the formerly incarcerated remain trapped in a cycle of failure. Hence, the PRI is not a broken system. Rather, it is an intentional form of structural violence perpetuated by the state to ensure the continued oppression of the most marginalized groups in our society.
AlexanderM. (2011). The new Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New York, NY: The New Press.
2.
AlperM.DuroseM. R.MarkmanJ. (2018). 2018 update on prisoner recidivism: A 9-year follow-up period (2005-2014) (Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, NCJ250975). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
3.
AschA. (2001). Critical race theory, feminism, and disability: Reflections on social justice and personal identity. Ohio State Law Journal, 62, 391-423.
BannonA.NagrechaM.DillerR. (2010). Criminal justice debt: A barrier to reentry. Washington, DC: Brennan Center for Justice.
6.
BellD. A. (1995). Racial realism. In CrenshawK.GotandaN.PellerG.ThomasK. (Eds.). Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement (pp. 302-312). New York, NY: The New Press.
DuroseM. R.CoopersA. D.SnyderH. N. (2014). Recidivism of prisoners released in 30 states in 2005: Patterns from 2005 to 2010 (NCJ 244205). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
14.
ErikksonP.HenttonenE.MerilainenS. (2012). Ethnographic field notes and reflexivity. In NaidooL. (Ed.), An ethnography of global landscapes and corridors (pp. 9-22). Rijeka, Croatia: InTech.
15.
FaugierJ.SargeantM. (1997). Sampling hard to reach populations. Journal of Advance Nursing, 26, 790-797.
16.
FoucaultM. (1979). Discipline and punishment: The birth of the prison. New York, NY: Random House.
HallettM. (2012). Reentry to what? Theorizing prisoner reentry in the jobless future. Critical Criminology, 20, 213-228.
19.
JohnsonK. R.JohnsonJ. (2012). Racial disadvantages and incarceration: Sources of wage inequality among African American, Latino, and White men. In BetancurJ. J.HerringC. (Eds.), Reinventing race, reinventing racism (pp. 271-296). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
KaebleD.BonczarT. P. (2017). Probation and parole in the United States, 2015. (NCJ250230). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
22.
LawrenceS.MearsD. P.DubinG.TravisJ. (2002). The practice and promise of prison programming. Washington, DC: Urban Institute of Justice.
23.
LermanA. E.WeaverV. M. (2014). Arresting citizenship: The democratic consequences of American crime control. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
24.
MartinL. (2013). Reentry within the carceral: Foucault, race, and prisoner reentry. Critical Criminology, 21, 493-508.
25.
MaxwellJ. A.MillerB. A. (2007). Categorizing and connecting strategies in qualitative data analysis. In LeavyP.Hesse-BiberS. (Ed.), Handbook of emergent research methods (pp. 461-477). Thousand Oaks, CA; Sage.
26.
MillerR. B. (2014). Devolving the carceral state: Race, prisoner reentry, and the micro-politics of urban poverty management. Punishment & Society, 16, 305-335.
27.
OlusanyaO.CancinoJ. (2012). Cross-examining the race-neutral frameworks of prisoner re-entry. Critical Criminology, 20, 345-358.
28.
PagerD. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 937-975.
29.
PetersiliaJ. (2003). When prisoners come home: Parole and prisoner reentry. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
PhelpsM. (2011). Rehabilitation in the punitive era: The gap between rhetoric and reality in U.S. prison programs. Law and Society Review, 45, 33-68.
32.
RossJ. I. (2010). Deconstructing the prisoner re-entry industry/complex: Origins of the term and critique of current literature/analysis. In EkunweI. O.JonesR. S. (Eds.), Global perspectives on re-entry (pp. 173-197). Tampere, Finland: Tampere University Press.
33.
SaldanaJ. (2012). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
SimonJ. (2010). Beyond the panopticon: Mass imprisonment and the humanities. Law, Culture and the Humanities, 6, 327-340.
37.
TaylorM. (2016). Adult earnings of juvenile delinquents: The interaction of race/ethnicity, gender, and juvenile justice status on future earnings. Justice Policy Journal, 13(2), 1-24.
38.
ThacerD. (2008). The rise of the criminal background screening in rental housing. Law & Social Inquiry, 33, 5-30.
39.
ThompkinsD. E. (2010). The expanding prisoner reentry industry. Dialectical Anthropology, 34, 589-604.
40.
ThompsonA. C. (2008). Releasing prisoners: Redeeming communities. New York: New York University Press.
41.
TravisJ. (2005). But they all come back: Facing the challenges of prisoner reentry. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
42.
WacquantL. (2000). The new peculiar institution: On the prison as surrogate ghetto. Theoretical Criminology, 4, 377-389.
43.
WacquantL. (2001). Deadly symbiosis: When ghetto and prison meet and mesh. Punishment & Society, 3, 95-133.
44.
WacquantL. (2009). Punishing the poor: The neoliberal government of social insecurity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
45.
WacquantL. (2010). Prisoner reentry as myth and ceremony. Dialectical Anthropology, 34, 605-620.
