Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article builds on the theory of the shadow carceral state and identifies prison trust accounts as a site of legal hybridity. Specifically, it examines in-prison banking systems to show how governments and prison administrators co-opt civil authority under state statutes, administrative regulations, and prison policies that allow carceral systems to oversee what would normally be a distinctly civil function. Moreover, prison systems co-opt this civil authority through paternalistic rationales that suggest that the goal of prison banking is rehabilitation and that controlling and seizing the money of incarcerated people inures to their benefit.

Keywords

Administrative banking carceral prison regulatory statutory

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Atahuene

(2023) A theory of stategraft. NYU Law Review 98: 1–48.

Beckett

Murakawa

(2012) Mapping the shadow carceral state: Toward an institutionally capacious approach to punishment. Theoretical Criminology 16(2): 221–244.

Blackmon

(2009) Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II. New York, NY, USA: Anchor Books.

Bureau of Prisons (undated) Inmate financial responsibility program: Procedures, Available at: https://www.regulations.gov/docket/BOP-2023-0001/comments (accessed 10 November 2023).

Cammett

(2022) The shadow law of child support. Boston University Law Review 102: 2256–2273.

Carpenter

Lawson

Deuser

(2021) What the great recession revealed about taxation by citation. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform 54: 893–915.

Colunga

(2008) An alternative Look at the takings clause and ITAs. University of Toledo Law Review 39: 791–811.

Diller

Nagrecha

Bannon

(2023) Reflections on fees and fines as stategraft. NYU Law Review Online 98: 262–281.

Fernandes

Friedman

Kirk

(2022) The ‘damaged’ state v. the ‘willful’ nonpayer: Pay-to-stay and the social construction of damage, harm, and moral responsibility in a rent-seeking society. The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 8(1): 82–105.

10.

Friedman

(2020) Unveiling the necrocapitalist dimensions of the shadow carceral state: On pay-to-stay to recoup the cost of incarceration. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 37(1): 66–87.

11.

Friedman

Fernandes

Kirk

(2021a) ‘Like if you get a hotel bill’: Consumer logic, pay-to-stay, and the production of incarceration as a public commodity. Sociological Forum 36(3): 735–757.

12.

Friedman

Harris

Huebner

, et al. (2021b) What is wrong with monetary sanctions? Directions for policy, practice, and research. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 8: 221–244.

13.

Friedman

Pattillo

(2019) Statutory inequality: The logics of monetary sanctions in state law. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences 5(1): 173–196.

14.

Harris

(2020) Framing the system of monetary sanctions as predatory. UCLA Criminal Justice Law Review 4(1): 1–8.

15.

Harris

Evans

Beckett

(2010) Drawing blood from stones: Legal debt and social inequality in the contemporary United States. American Journal of Sociology 115(6): 1753–1799.

16.

Journal Record Staff (2016) Audit: nearly $200K missing from Tulsa jail inmate account. Journal Record, 2 March, Available at: https://journalrecord.com/audit-nearly-200k-missing-from-tulsa-jail-inmate-account/ (accessed 10 November 2023).

17.

Kalthoff

(2021) Dallas county jail inmate money missing, NBCDFW, 19 October, Available at: https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/dallas-county-jail-inmate-money-missing/2775003/ (accessed 10 November 2023).

18.

Katzenstein

Waller

(2015) Taxing the poor: Incarceration, poverty governance, and the seizure of family resources. Perspectives on Politics 13(3): 638–656.

19.

Kirk-Werner

Fernandes

Friedman

(2024) Pay-to-stay as stategraft. Wisconsin Law Review Forward 2024: 1–4.

20.

Koziol

(1989) Inmates pay their debt—all of it. Chicago Tribune 1: 23, 1 January.

21.

Littman

(2022) Free-world law behind bars. Yale Law Journal 131: 1385–1482.

22.

Maciag

(2019) Addicted to fines, Governing, September.

23.

Martin

(2018) Monetary myopia: An examination of institutional response to revenue from monetary sanctions for misdemeanors. Criminal Justice Policy Review 29(6-7): 630–662.

24.

Menendez

Crowley

Eisen

, et al. (2019) The Steep Cost of Fines and Fees. Report. New York, NY, USA: Brennan Center for Justice. 21 November.

25.

Nagrecha

Katzenstein

(2010) A new punishment regime. Criminology and Public Policy 10(3): 555–568.

26.

Nam-Sonenstein

(2024) Shadow budgets: How mass incarceration steals from the poor to give to the prison. Prison Policy Initiative, 6 May, Available at: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/shadowbudgets.html.

27.

Nelson

Highsmith

Kornya

, et al. (2020) Commercialized (In)Justice Litigation Guide. Report. Boston, MA, USA: National Consumer Law Center. 1 June.

28.

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (2021) Safety and Soundness: Payments Systems , pp. 1–105.

29.

Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (undated) Comptroller’s Handbook, Available at: https://www.occ.gov/publications-and-resources/publications/comptrollers-handbook/index-comptrollers-handbook.html (accessed 10 November 2023).

30.

Pager

Goldstein

, et al. (2022) Criminalizing poverty: The consequences of court fees in a randomized experiment. American Sociological Review 87(3): 529–553.

31.

Raher

(2020) The company store and the literally captive market: Consumer law in prisons and jails. Hastings Race and Poverty Law Journal 17(1): 3–86.

32.

Rhode Island Department of Corrections (2013) Inmate rule book, March.

33.

Rhode Island Department of Corrections (undated) Inmate accounts, Available at: https://doc.ri.gov/family-visitors/inmate-accounts#:∼:text=You%20can%20call%20844%2D340,1%20pm%20and%203%20pm (accessed 10 November 2023).

34.

Soss

Fording

Schram

(2011) Disciplining the Poor: Neoliberal Paternalism and the Persistent Power of Race. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

35.

Stockler

Moritz-Rabson

(2021) Prisons are skimming big chunks of CARES act stimulus checks. The Intercept 17 February, Available at: https://theintercept.com/2021/02/17/stimulus-checks-cares-prisons-skimming-irs/ (accessed 10 November 2023).

36.

Thurston

(2020) Hidden fees? The hidden state framework and the reform prospects for systems of monetary sanctions. UCLA Criminal Justice Law Review 4: 283–292.

37.

UN General Assembly (2016) United Nations standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules): Rule 103(3), adopted by the General Assembly, 8 January, A/RES/70/175, Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/5698a3a44.html (accessed 10 November 2023).

38.

US Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division (2015) Investigation of the Ferguson Police Department. Report, 4 March.

39.

US Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Prisons (2018) Trust fund/deposit fund manual. Program Statement 4500.12, 14 March.

40.

US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General (2024) Audit of the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Inmate Financial Responsibility Program, i.

41.

VanCleave

(2024) Prison banking. California Law Review 112(5).

Banking in the shadows of the carceral state: Prisons,paternalism,and the regulation of money in prison trust accounts

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References