Drug crimes are socially and politically constructed phenomena that are frequently embedded in narratives about foreign threats and national security. Yet research on how nationality structures sentencing outcomes, particularly in China, remains limited. Analyzing 2804 first-instance drug crime judgments (2017–2019) from the Peking University Law Database, this study reveals a patterned and stratified relationship between nationality and punishment. Foreign defendants generally receive harsher sentences than Chinese citizens, but this disparity varies across groups. Defendants from certain Asian countries face the most severe penalties, whereas African and European/American defendants often receive comparatively lenient outcomes. These results challenge a simple “alien penalty” account and instead point to a differentiated and crime-contingent mechanism in which national origin intersects with security narratives and stereotypes surrounding transnational drug trafficking. The study advances focal concerns theory beyond Western contexts by demonstrating that nationality operates as a hierarchically structured and situationally activated status cue in judicial decision-making.
AlbonettiCA (1991) An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion. Social Problems38(2): 247–266.
2.
AngSMartinF (2024) Pandemic politics and the rise of immigration: Online attitudes towards westerners and the West in China. Global Networks24(1): e12435.
3.
BarnesCWKingsnorthR (1996) Race, drug, and criminal sentencing: Hidden effects of the criminal law. Journal of Criminal Justice24(1): 39–55.
4.
BlackwellMIacusSKingG, et al. (2009) Cem: coarsened exact matching in stata. The Stata Journal9(4): 524–546.
5.
BrandonAMO’ConnellM (2018) Same crime: Different punishment? Investigating sentencing disparities between Irish and non-Irish nationals in the Irish criminal justice system. British Journal of Criminology58(5): 1127–1146.
6.
CaiTXiaYZhouY (2018) Generalized inflated discrete models: A strategy to work with multimodal discrete distributions. Sociological Methods & Research50(1): 365–400.
7.
ChengY (2011) From campus racism to cyber racism: Discourse of race and Chinese nationalism. The China Quarterly207: 561–579.
8.
ChinKZhangSX (2015) The Chinese Heroin Trade: Cross-Border Drug Trafficking in Southeast Asia and Beyond. New York: New York University Press.
9.
CorvaD (2008) Neoliberal globalization and the war on drugs: Transnationalizing illiberal governance in the Americas. Political Geography27(2): 176–193.
10.
CottamMLMareninO (2005) The management of border security in NAFTA: imagery, nationalism, and the war on drugs. International Criminal Justice Review15(1): 5–37.
11.
DemuthS (2002) The effect of citizenship status on sentencing outcomes in drug cases. Federal Sentencing Reporter14(5): 271–275.
12.
FeldmeyerBWarrenPYSiennickSE, et al. (2015) Racial, ethnic, and immigrant threat: Is there a new criminal threat on state sentencing?Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency52(1): 62–92.
13.
FranklinTWFearnNE (2015) Sentencing Asian offenders in state courts: the influence of a prevalent stereotype. Crime & Delinquency61(1): 96–120.
14.
GalvinMAUlmerJT (2021) Expanding our understanding of focal concerns: Alternative sentences, race, and ‘salvageability’. Justice Quarterly39(6): 1332–1353.
15.
GasperettiMA (2022) Crime and punishment: An empirical study of the effects of racial bias on capital sentencing decisions. University of Miami Law Review76(2): 525–611.
16.
Gazal-AyalOSulitzeanu-KenanR (2010) Let my people go: ethnic in-group bias in judicial decisions—Evidence from a randomized natural experiment. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies7(3): 403–428.
17.
HamiltonM (2017) Sentencing disparities. British Journal of American Legal Studies6(2): 177–224.
18.
HartleyRD (2014) Focal concerns theory. In: MillerM (ed) The Encyclopaedia of Theoretical Criminology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 1–5.
19.
HartleyRDArmendarizLF (2011) Border justice? Sentencing federal narcotics offenders in southwest border districts: A focus on citizenship status. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice27(1): 43–62.
20.
HartleyRDMaddanSSpohnCC (2007) Concerning conceptualization and operationalization: Sentencing data and the focal concerns perspectives – A research note. Southwest Journal of Criminal Justice4(1): 58–78.
21.
HaugenHØ (2012) Nigerians In China: A second state of immobility. International Migration50(2): 65–80.
22.
HeC (2025) Beyond focal concerns: A qualitative study of sentencing decisions in China’s sociopolitical context. Asian Journal of Criminology20: 283–303.
23.
HolmesBFeldmeyerBKuligTC (2020) Sentencing departures and focal concerns: The joint effect of race and gender on departures in United States district courts, 2014–2016. Journal of Crime and Justice43(5): 598–622.
24.
HuangYZhangH (2010) On the penalty for smuggling, trafficking, transporting and manufacturing the drugs. Journal of Central South University (Social Science)16(5): 58–63.
25.
IacusSMKingGPorroG (2012) Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Analysis20(1): 1–24.
26.
JiangSWuY (2025) Plea discounts or trial penalties? An empirical analysis of China’s plea-leniency system and its impact on sentencing. Asian Journal of Criminology20: 371–392.
27.
JohnsonBDBetsingerS (2009) Punishing the ‘model minority’: Asian-American criminal sentencing outcomes in federal district courts. Criminology; An Interdisciplinary Journal47(4): 1045–1090.
28.
JohnsonBDVan WingerdenSNieuwbeertaP (2010) Sentencing homicide offenders in the Netherlands: offender, victim, and situation influences in criminal punishment. Criminology; An Interdisciplinary Journal48(4): 981–1018.
29.
JonesCSKaplanMF (2003) The effects of racially stereotypical crimes on juror decision-making and information-processing strategies. Basic and Applied Social Psychology25(1): 1–13.
30.
KempSVaronaD (2023) Foreign and dangerous? Unpacking the role of judges and prosecutors in sentencing disparities in Spain. British Journal of Criminology63(4): 984–1002.
31.
KenthirarajahDCampNPWaltonGM, et al. (2023) Does ‘Jamal’ receive a harsher sentence than ‘James’? First-name bias in the criminal sentencing of black men. Law and Human Behavior47(1): 169–181.
32.
KooDFeldmeyerBHolmesB (2022) Citizenship and sentencing: Assessing intersectionality in national origin and legal migration status on federal sentencing outcomes. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency59(2): 203–239.
33.
LanS (2017) ‘China gives and China takes’: African traders and the nondocumenting states. Focaal—Journal of Global and Historical Anthropology77: 50–62.
34.
LanSSierWCamenischA (2022) Precarious whiteness in pandemic times in China. Asian Anthropology21(3): 161–170.
35.
LiELinXLiuS (2023) China’s regulation of COVID-19 through criminal justice innovation. China: An International Journal21(1): 1–23.
36.
LiSD (2014) Toward a cost-effective correctional system: New developments in community-based corrections in China. Victims & Offenders9(1): 120–125.
37.
LightMT (2014) The new face of legal inequality: Noncitizens and the long-term trends in sentencing disparities across U.S. district court, 1992-2009. Law & Society Review48(2): 447–478.
38.
LightMT (2016) The punishment consequences of lacking national membership in Germany, 1998-2010. Social Forces94(3): 1385–1408.
39.
LightMTMassogliaMKingRD (2014) Citizenship and punishment: The salience of national membership in U.S. criminal courts. American Sociological Review79(5): 825–847.
40.
LightMTWerminkH (2021) The criminal case processing of foreign nationals in the Netherlands. European Sociological Review37(1): 104–120.
LiuSXiongMLiangB (2019) The death penalty for foreign drug offenders in China: Legal protection and equal treatment. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research25(4): 427–448.
43.
LogueMA (2009) ‘The price of being Mexican’: Sentencing disparities between noncitizen Mexican and non-Mexican Latinos in the federal courts. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences31(4): 423–445.
44.
LuHMietheTDLiangB (2016) China’s Drug Practices and Policies: Regulating Controlled Substances in a Global Context. New York: Routledge.
45.
LuJ (2022) On the crime control strategy in the era of misdemeanors. Political Science and Law1: 51–66.
46.
LynchM (2019) Focally concerned about focal concerns: A conceptual and methodological critique of sentencing disparities research. Justice Quarterly36(7): 1148–1175.
NiX (1991) Analysis of recent trials of foreign-related drug smuggling crimes. Journal of Guizhou Police College2: 26–28.
50.
O’NealENSpohnC (2017) When the perpetrator is a partner: arrest and charging decisions in intimate partner sexual assault cases – A focal concerns analysis. Violence Against Women23(6): 707–729.
51.
PengYChengJ (2020) Ethnic disparity in Chinese theft sentencing: A modified focal concerns perspective. China Review22(3): 47–71.
52.
PiekeFN (2012) Immigrant China. Modern China38(1): 40–77.
53.
QiuGZhangSXLiuW (2019) Trafficking of Myanmar women for forced marriage in China. Crime, Law and Social Change72(1): 35–52.
54.
RibaJMLCabelloÚRGómezDV, et al. (2022) Equality before the court? Studying citizenship disparities in sentencing in Catalonia. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research29(4): 601–624.
55.
RoseMRRountreeMM (2022) The focal concerns of jurors evaluating mitigation: Evidence from federal capital jury forms. Law & Society Review56(2): 213–236.
56.
ShaoZWuQ (2025) Penalty effect of China’s plea leniency system: Evidence from theft cases. International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice82: 100769.
57.
SkorinkoJLSpellmanBA (2013) Stereotypic crimes: How group-crime associations affect memory and (sometimes) verdicts and sentencing. Victims & Offenders8(3): 278–307.
58.
SteenSEngenRLGaineyRR (2005) Images of danger and culpability: Racial stereotyping, case processing, and criminal sentencing. Criminology; An Interdisciplinary Journal43(2): 435–468.
59.
SteffensmeierDDemuthS (2001) Ethnicity and judges’ sentencing decisions: Hispanic-black-white comparisons. Criminology; An Interdisciplinary Journal39(1): 145–178.
60.
SteffensmeierDPainter-DavisN (2018) Focal concerns theory as a conceptual tool for studying intersectionality in sentencing disparities: A focus on gender and race along with age. In: UlmerJTBradleyMS (eds) Handbook on Punishment Decisions: Locations of Disparity. New York: Routledge, 189–210.
61.
SteffensmeierDUlmerJKramerJ (1998) The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: the punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology; An Interdisciplinary Journal36(4): 763–798.
62.
SuX (2015) Nontraditional security and China’s transnational narcotics control in northern Laos and Myanmar. Political Geography48: 72–82.
63.
SwanströmN (2006) Narcotics and China: An old security threat from new sources. China and Eurasia Forum Quarterly4(1): 113–131.
64.
TangRCaiT (2021) Smuggling of drugs by body packing: Evidence from Chinese sentencing documents. International Journal of Drug Policy90: 103022.
65.
UlmerJTKonefalK (2019) Sentencing the ‘Other’: Punishment of Latinx defendants. UCLA Law Review66(6): 1716–1761.
66.
UlmerJTSilverEHanrathLS (2022) Back to basics: A critical examination of the focal concerns framework from the perspective of judges. Justice Quarterly40(6): 813–836.
67.
Van WingerdenSVan WilsemJJohnsonBD (2016) Offender’s personal circumstances and punishment: toward a more refined model for the explanation of sentencing disparities. Justice Quarterly33(1): 100–133.
68.
VolkovV (2016) Legal and extralegal origins of sentencing disparities: evidence from Russia’s criminal courts. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies13(4): 637–665.
69.
WalkerDCesarGT (2020) Examining the ‘gang penalty’ in the juvenile justice system: A focal concerns perspective. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice18(4): 315–336.
70.
WangD (2023) Joint liability and aggravation? An inspection of legislative and judicial practices in cases of the crime of the abduction, sale, and purchase of women and children in China. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications10: 785.
71.
WangF (2025) Sentencing disparity and focal concern: An assessment of judicial decisions on sha zhu pan cases collected from China judgements online. Crime & Delinquency71(6-7): 1845–1877.
72.
WangPAntonopoulosGA (2016) Organized crime and illegal gambling: How do illegal gambling enterprises respond to the challenges posed by their illegality in China?Australian & New Zealand Journal of Criminology49(2): 258–280.
73.
WangW (1998) Symposium on the work of the courts of some provinces, autonomous regions and municipalities in hearing criminal cases involving foreigners, overseas Chinese, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. In: SunWZ (eds) Law Yearbook of China. Beijing: Law Press, 139–140.
74.
WangYLiuJZhouH (2025) Describing the evolution of three features of China’s drug policy: regulation, crime and punishment, and rehabilitation. International Journal of Drug Policy140: 104827.
75.
WolfeSEPyroozDCSpohnCC (2011) Unraveling the effect of offender citizenship status on federal sentencing outcomes. Social Science Research40(1): 349–362.
76.
WuJ (2023) Within-race variations in sentencing outcomes: Nationality and punishment among Asians in United States federal courts. Punishment & Society25(2): 449–470.
77.
WuJD’AngeloJM (2014) Unwarranted disparity in federal sentencing: Noncitizen crime as a social/group threat. Criminal Justice Review39(1): 58–80.
78.
WuY (2008) Characteristics of drug crimes and reflection on sentencing. Chinese Lawyer5: 62–63.
79.
XiaY (2023) Trade-off between ‘big data’ and ‘small data’: A simulation study on the application of random sampling in Chinese empirical legal studies. Hong Kong Law Journal53(3): 1215–1240.
80.
XiaYCaiTZhongH (2019a) Effect of judges’ gender on rape sentencing: A data mining approach to analyze judgement documents. China Review19(2): 125–149.
81.
XiaYZhouYCaiT (2019b) gidm: A command for generalized inflated discrete models. The Stata Journal19(3): 698–718.
82.
XiaYZhouYDuL, et al. (2020) Mapping trafficking of women in China: Evidence from court sentence. Journal of Contemporary China29(122): 238–252.
XinYCaiT (2020) Paying money for freedom: Effects of monetary compensation on sentencing for criminal traffic offenses in China. Journal of Quantitative Criminology36(1): 1–28.
85.
XiongMLiuSLiangB (2018) Criminal defense and judicial sentencing in China’s death penalty cases. Psychology, Crime & Law24(4): 414–432.
YuZ (2012) Criminal law responses to crimes committed by foreigners in China. Social Sciences in China6: 134–150.
88.
ZhangYChengH (2025) Talented youths or dangerous criminals? Exploring judicial attitudes in the sentencing of data crime cases in Chinese courts. Criminal Justice and Behavior52(6): 896–915.
89.
ZhouQ (2022) Report of the Supreme People’s Court on the People’s Courts’ foreign-related trial work: Delivered at the 37th meeting of the Standing Committee of the 13th National People’s Congress on October 28, 2022. Available at: http://gongbao.court.gov.cn/Details/27948895a20b4e054ee58650875205.html (accessed 3 April 2025).
90.
ZhouYWangQ (2018) Study on the countermeasures to the high arrest rate of foreign criminal cases in China. Journal of Anhui Vocational College of Police Officers17(2): 51–55.
91.
ZhuW (2015) A discussion on countermeasures of drug-related crimes among foreigners in Guangdong. Chinese Criminology Review1: 59–73.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
