The United States v. Booker decision rendered Federal Sentencing Guidelines advisory rather than mandatory. In the context of this decision, this study examines both the direct influence of aggregate-level political, community, and administrative variables on sentencing outcomes, and the way that such characteristics might contextualize individual-level predictors. Using multi-level regression techniques, this study examines the role of aggregate-level variables on sentence length decisions across four distinct time periods. Moreover, this article also examines whether aggregate-level variables condition the effects of race/ethnicity on sentencing outcomes. Whereas the direct effects of aggregate-level variables on sentencing outcomes are generally limited to political climate effects, there is evidence that political climate and other aggregate-level measures contextualize individual-level race/ethnicity effects. Future research should seek to better understand the specific mechanisms behind these relationships.
AlbonettiC. A. (1990). Race and the probability of pleading guilty. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 6, 315-334.
2.
AlbonettiC. A. (1997). Sentencing under the federal sentencing guidelines: Effects of defendant characteristics, guilty pleas, and departures on sentence outcomes for drug offenses, 1991-1992. Law & Society Review, 31, 789-822.
3.
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466. (2000).
4.
BeneshS. C. (2006). Understanding public confidence in American courts. Journal of Politics, 68, 697-707.
5.
Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296. (2004).
6.
BlalockH. M. (1967). Toward a theory of minority-group relations. New York, NY: John Wiley.
7.
BontragerS.BalesW.ChiricosT. (2005). Race, ethnicity, threat, and the labeling of convicted felons. Criminology, 43, 589-622.
8.
BrittC. L. (2000). Social context and racial disparities in punishment decisions. Justice Quarterly, 17, 707-732.
9.
CaldeiraG. A. (1986). Neither the purse nor the sword: Dynamics of public confidence in the Supreme Court. American Political Science Review, 80, 1209-1226.
10.
CaldeiraG. A. (1987). Public opinion and the US Supreme Court: FDR’s court-packing plan. American Political Science Review, 81, 1139-1153.
11.
CarmichaelJ. T. (2005). The determinants of jail use across large U.S. cities: An assessment of racial, ethnic, and economic threat explanations. Social Science Research, 34, 538-569.
12.
ChiricosT. G.CrawfordC. (1995). Race and imprisonment: A contextual assessment of the evidence. In HawkinsD. F. (Ed.), Ethnicity, race, and crime: Perspectives across time and place (Vol. 13, pp. 281-309). New York, NY: State University of New York Press.
13.
CrawfordC.ChiricosC.KleckG. (1998). Race, racial threat, and sentencing of habitual offenders. Criminology, 36, 481-511.
14.
CrowM. S.JohnsonK. A. (2008). Race, ethnicity, and habitual-offender sentencing: A multilevel analysis of individual and contextual threat. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 19, 63-83.
15.
DemuthS.SteffensmeierD. (2004). Ethnicity effects on sentence outcomes in large urban courts: Comparisons among White, Black, and Hispanic defendants. Social Science Quarterly, 85, 994-1011.
16.
DixonJ. (1995). The organizational context of criminal sentencing. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 1157-1198.
17.
DoernerJ. K.DemuthS. (2010). The independent and joint effects of race/ethnicity, gender, and age on sentencing outcomes in US federal courts. Justice Quarterly, 27, 1-27.
18.
EisensteinJ.FlemmingR. B.NardulliP. F. (1988). The contours of justice: Communities and their courts. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
19.
EngenR. (2011). Racial disparity in the wake of Booker/Fanfan: Making sense of “messy” results and other challenges for sentencing research. Criminology & Public Policy, 10, 1139-1149.
20.
EngenR. L.GaineyR. R. (2000). Modeling the effects of legally relevant and extralegal factors under sentencing guidelines: The rules have changed. Criminology, 38, 1207-1230.
21.
EngenR. L.SteenS. (2000). The power to punish: Discretion and sentencing reform in the war on drugs. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 1357-1395.
22.
EverettR. S.WojtkiewiczR. A. (2002). Difference, disparity, and race/ethnic bias in federal sentencing. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18, 189-211.
23.
FearnN. E. (2005). A multilevel analysis of community effects on criminal sentencing. Justice Quarterly, 22, 452-487.
24.
FeldmeyerB.UlmerJ. T. (2011). Racial/ethnic threat and federal sentencing. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 48, 238-270.
25.
FischmanJ. B.SchanzenbachM. M. (2012). Racial disparities under the federal sentencing guidelines: The role of judicial discretion and mandatory minimums. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 9, 729-764.
26.
FraseR. S. (2007). The Apprendi-Blakely cases: Sentencing reform counter revolution?Criminology & Public Policy, 6, 403-431.
27.
FreiburgerT. L.HilinskiC. M. (2011). Probation officers’ recommendations and final sentencing outcomes. Journal of Crime and Justice, 34, 45-61.
28.
FriddleT.SandsJ. M. (2004). Don’t think twice, it’s all right: Remands, federal sentencing guidelines & the Protect Act-A radical departure. Arizona State Law Journal, 36, 527-549.
29.
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38. (2007).
30.
GarlandD. (2001). The culture of control: Crime and social order in contemporary society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
31.
GelmanA.HillJ. (2006). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
32.
GibbsJ. P. (1975). Crime, punishment, and deterrence. New York, NY: Elsevier.
33.
GreenbergD. F.WestV. (2001). State prison populations and their growth: 1971-1991. Criminology, 39, 615-654.
34.
HelmsR.CostanzaS. E. (2010). Modeling the politics of punishment: A contextual analysis of racial disparity in drug sentencing. Criminal Justice Review, 35, 472-491.
35.
HelmsR.JacobsD. (2002). The political context of sentencing: An analysis of community and individual determinants. Social Forces, 81, 577-604.
36.
JacobsD.HelmsR. (1999). Collective outbursts, politics, and punitive resources: Toward a political sociology of spending on social control. Social Forces, 77, 1497-1523.
37.
JacobsD.HelmsR. (2001). Toward a political sociology of punishment: Politics and changes in the incarcerated population. Social Science Research, 30, 171-194.
38.
JacobsD.HelmsR. E. (1996). Toward a political model of incarceration: A time-series examination of multiple explanations for prison admission rates. American Journal of Sociology, 102, 323-357.
39.
JacobsD.JacksonA. L. (2010). On the politics of imprisonments: A review of systematic findings. Annual Review of Law & Social Sciences, 6, 129-149.
40.
JohnsonB. D. (2005). Contextual disparities in guidelines departures: Courtroom social contexts, guidelines compliance, and extra-legal disparities in criminal sentencing. Criminology, 43, 761-796.
41.
JohnsonB. D.LeeJ. G. (2013). Racial disparity under sentencing guidelines: A survey of recent research and emerging perspectives. Sociology Compass, 7, 503-514.
42.
JohnsonB. D.UlmerJ. T.KramerJ. H. (2008). The social context of guidelines circumvention: The case of federal district courts. Criminology, 46, 737-784.
43.
JordanK. L.FreiburgerT. L. (2010). Examining the impact of race and ethnicity on the sentencing of juveniles in the adult court. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 21, 185-201.
44.
KauttP. M. (2002). Location, location, location: Interdistrict and intercircuit variation in sentencing outcomes for federal drug-trafficking offenses. Justice Quarterly, 19, 633-671.
45.
KauttP. M.SpohnC. (2002). Crack-ing down on Black drug offenders? Testing for interactions among offenders’ race, drug type, and sentencing strategy in federal drug sentences. Justice Quarterly, 19, 1-35.
46.
KeenB.JacobsD. (2009). Racial threat, partisan politics, and racial disparities in prison admissions: A panel analysis. Criminology, 47, 209-238.
47.
KimB.CanoM. V.KimK.SpohnC. (2014). The impact of United States v. Booker and Gall/Kimbrough v. United States on sentence severity: Assessing social context and judicial discretion. Crime & Delinquency. Advance online publication. DOI: 10.1177/0011128714551783
48.
Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85. (2007).
49.
KramerJ. H.SteffensmeierD. (1993). Race and imprisonment decisions. The Sociological Quarterly, 34, 357-376.
50.
KramerJ. H.UlmerJ. T. (2002). Downward departures for serious violent offenders: Local court corrections to Pennsylvania’s sentencing guidelines. Criminology, 40, 897-932.
51.
KramerJ. H.UlmerJ. T. (2009). Sentencing guidelines: Lessons from Pennsylvania. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
52.
LevinM. A. (1972). Urban politics and judicial behavior. The Journal of Legal Studies, 1, 193-221.
53.
LynchM.OmoriM. (2014). Legal change and sentencing norms in the wake of Booker: The impact of time and place on drug trafficking cases in federal court. Law & Society Review, 48, 411-445.
54.
MitchellO. (2005). A meta-analysis of race and sentencing research: Explaining the inconsistencies. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 21, 439-466.
55.
MustardD. B. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in sentencing: Evidence from the U.S. federal courts. Journal of Law & Economics, 44, 285-314.
56.
MyersM. A.TalaricoS. M. (1986). The social contexts of racial discrimination in sentencing. Social Problems, 33, 236-251.
57.
MyersM. A.TalaricoS. M. (1987). The social contexts of criminal sentencing. New York, NY: Springer.
58.
NowackiJ. S. (2015). Race, ethnicity, and judicial discretion: The influence of the United States v. Booker decision. Crime & Delinquency, 61, 1360-1385.
59.
PackerH. (1968). The limits of the criminal sanction. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
60.
RehaviM. M.StarrS. B. (2014). Racial disparity in federal criminal sentences. Journal of Political Economy, 122, 1320-1354.
61.
SampsonR. J. (2006, March11). Open doors don’t invite criminals. New York Times, pp. A27.
62.
SavelsbergJ. J. (1992). Law that does not fit society: Sentencing guidelines as a neoclassical reaction to the dilemmas of substantivized law. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1346-1381.
63.
SpohnC. (2000). Thirty years of sentencing reform: The quest for a racially neutral sentencing process. Criminal Justice, 3, 427-501.
64.
SpohnC. (2013). The effects of the offender’s race, ethnicity, and sex on federal sentencing outcomes in the guidelines era. Law & Contemporary Problems, 76, 75-104.
65.
SpohnC.CederblomJ. (1991). Race and disparities in sentencing: A test of the liberation hypothesis. Justice Quarterly, 8, 305-327.
66.
SpohnC.DeLoneM. (2000). When does race matter? An analysis of the conditions under which race affects sentence severity. Sociology of Crime, Law, and Deviance, 2, 3-37.
67.
SpohnC.HolleranD. (2000). The imprisonment penalty paid by young, unemployed black and Hispanic male offenders. Criminology, 38, 281-306.
68.
SpohnC.SampleL. L. (2013). The dangerous drug offender in federal court: Intersections of race, ethnicity, and culpability. Crime & Delinquency, 59, 3-31.
69.
SpohnC.WelchS.GruhlJ. (1985). Women defendants in court: The interaction between sex and race in convicting and sentencing. Social Science Quarterly, 66, 178-185.
70.
StarrS. B.RehaviM. M. (2013). Mandatory sentencing and racial disparity: Assessing the role of prosecutors and the effects of Booker. Yale Law Journal, 123, 2-81.
71.
SteenS.EngenR. L.GaineyR. R. (2005). Images of danger and culpability: Racial stereotyping, case processing, and criminal sentencing. Criminology, 43, 435-468.
72.
SteffensmeierD.DemuthS. (2000). Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in US federal courts: Who is punished more harshly?American Sociological Review, 65, 705-729.
73.
SteffensmeierD.DemuthS. (2006). Does gender modify the effects of race–ethnicity on criminal sanctioning? Sentences for male and female White, Black, and Hispanic defendants. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 241-261.
74.
SteffensmeierD.KramerJ.StreifelC. (1993). Gender and imprisonment decisions. Criminology, 31, 411-446.
75.
SteffensmeierD.UlmerJ. T.KramerJ. (1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, Black, and male. Criminology, 36, 763-797.
76.
TillyerR.HartleyR. (2013). The use and impact of fast-track departures: Exploring prosecutorial and judicial discretion in federal immigration cases. Crime & Delinquency. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0011128713505481
77.
TonryM. (1995). Malign neglect: Race, crime, and punishment in America. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
78.
TonryM. (1996). Sentencing matters. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
79.
UlmerJ. T.EisensteinJ.JohnsonB. D. (2010). Trial penalties in federal sentencing: Extra-guidelines factors and district variation. Justice Quarterly, 27, 560-592.
80.
UlmerJ. T.JohnsonB. (2004). Sentencing in context: A multilevel analysis. Criminology, 42, 137-177.
81.
UlmerJ. T.KramerJ. H. (1996). Court communities under sentencing guidelines: Dilemmas of formal rationality and sentencing disparity. Criminology, 34, 383-408.
82.
UlmerJ. T.LightM. T.KramerJ. (2011a). The liberation of federal judges’ discretion in the wake of the Booker/Fanfan decision: Is there increased disparity and divergence between courts?Justice Quarterly, 28, 799-837.
83.
UlmerJ. T.LightM. T.KramerJ. (2011b). Racial disparity in the wake of the Booker/Fanfan decision. Criminology & Public Policy, 10, 1077-1118.
84.
United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220. (2005).
85.
UnneverJ. D.HembroffL. A. (1988). The prediction of racial/ethnic sentencing disparities: An expectation states approach. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 25, 53-82.
86.
U.S. Sentencing Commission. (2006). Final report on the impact of United States v. Booker on federal sentencing. Washington, DC: Author.
87.
U.S. Sentencing Commission. (2010). Demographic differences in federal sentencing practices: An update of the Booker report’s multivariate regression analysis. Washington, DC: Author.
88.
U.S. Sentencing Commission. (2012). Report on the continuing impact of United States v. Booker on federal sentencing. Washington, DC: Author.
89.
WangX.MearsD. P. (2010). Examining the direct and interactive effects of changes in racial and ethnic threat on sentencing decisions. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 47, 522-557.
90.
WarrenP.ChiricosT.BalesW. (2012). The imprisonment penalty for young Black and Hispanic males a crime-specific analysis. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 49, 56-80.
91.
WeidnerR. R.FraseR. S.PardoeI. (2004). Explaining sentence severity in large urban communities: A multilevel analysis of contextual and case-level factors. The Prison Journal, 84, 184-207.
92.
WeidnerR. R.FraseR. S.SchultzJ. S. (2005). The impact of contextual factors on the decision to imprison in large urban jurisdictions: A multilevel analysis. Crime & Delinquency, 51, 400-424.
93.
WelchS.CombsM.GruhlJ. (1988). Do Black judges make a difference?American Journal of Political Science, 32, 126-136.
94.
WestB. T.WelchK. B.GaleckiA. T. (2006). Linear mixed models: A practical guide using statistical software. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
95.
WilhelmD. F.TurnerN. R. (2002). Is the budget crisis changing the way we look at sentencing and incarceration?Federal Sentencing Reporter, 15, 41-49.
96.
WooldredgeJ. (2007). Neighborhood effects on felony sentencing. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 44, 238-263.
97.
WooldredgeJ. (2012). Distinguishing race effects on pre-trial release and sentencing decisions. Justice Quarterly, 29, 41-75.
98.
WooldredgeJ.FrankJ.GouletteN.TravisL. (2015). Is the impact of cumulative disadvantage on sentencing greater for black defendants?Criminology & Public Policy, 14, 187-223.
99.
ZatzM. S. (1987). The changing forms of racial/ethnic biases in sentencing. Journal of Research in Crime & Delinquency, 24, 69-92.
