The Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy is a multidisciplinary, collaborative venture to produce research, research-based policy prescriptions, and curricular innovation on the most challenging civil rights, education, criminal justice, family and economic security, immigration and healthcare issues facing California and the Nation. The Warren Institute’s mission is to engage the most difficult topics in a wide range of legal and public policy subject areas, providing valuable intellectual capital to public and private sector leaders, the media and the general public, while advancing scholarly understanding. Central to its methods are concerted efforts to build bridges connecting the world of research with the world of civic action and policy debate so that each informs the other, while preserving the independence, quality and credibility of the academic enterprise.
WHAT'S NEW
NEW RESEARCH
RAISING THE BAR: BUILDING CAPACITY: DRIVING IMPROVEMENTS IN CALIFORNIA'S CONTINUATION HIGH SCHOOLS
This report summaries findings and recommendations from a multi-year study of continuation high schools in California. It is the second in s series of reports from the on-going California Alternative Education Research Project, conducted jointly by the John W. Gardner Center at the Standford University School of Education, and the Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law.
To download the executive summary, click here.
To download the report, click here.
THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT REALIGNMENT IN CALIFORNIA
"A new report released by the Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy gives journalists, advocates, community members and others the information they need to understand, ask the right questions, and reach their own conclusions about realignment. The report explains in plain language the changes made by realignment, highlights existing tension points, and sets out issues to watch for in the future."
To download the report, click here.
REPORT FINDS BIOMETRIC ID CARD COULD COST TAXPAYERS AT LEAST $40 BILLION
A new report, released by the Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law & Social Policy at UC Berkeley School of Law, is a first-ever in-depth analysis of the costs of establishing a biometric employment identity card. Hard to BELIEVE: The High Cost of a Biometric Identity Card finds that a biometric ID card would not only have a price tag of over $40 billion in initial costs, but also $3 billion in ongoing annual expenditures. The study finds that such a card would infringe on Americans’ civil liberties, and fail to stop the employment of undocumented immigrants.
For media release, click here.
To download the report, click here.
SECURE COMMUNITIES BY THE NUMBERS: AN ANALYSIS OF DEMOGRAPHICS AND DUE PROCESS
A new report Secure Communities by the Numbers: An Analysis of Demographics and Due Process provides the first-ever analysis of federal data on people who are arrested and placed in deportation proceedings under the Secure Communities immigration enforcement program. The majority of people arrested in a fast-growing federal immigration enforcement program are jailed without bond, without access to a lawyer, and without a court hearing, according to this research. The report also finds that the Secure Communities program has led to thousands of wrongful arrests of U.S. citizens, while tens of thousands of families are split apart.
To download report, click here. To download media release, click here.
Note: The report available for downloading contains two minor revisions on pages 2 and 13 and supersedes the previous version.
|
The Berkeley Center for Criminal Justice (BCCJ) and the Center for Health, Economic & Family Security (CHEFS) have merged with the original Warren Institute on Race, Ethnicity, and Diversity to create an expanded Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy. The criminal justice program and the programs in health, economic and family security will have much the same focus, but they will now be able to tap the broader expertise of the larger research unit. The consolidation of these think tanks will spur greater collaboration among scholars and policy experts as the law school continues to research urgent social and legal issues. |
Press Release: Berkeley Law Think Tanks Merge Into Research PowerHouse
NEW ISSUE BRIEFS:
Hollywood's Race / Ethnicity and Gender-Based Casting: Prospects for a Title VII Lawsuit
Hollywood studios often specify a preferred race/ethnicity or gender for particular roles, preferences that are recorded in casting announcements, or “breakdowns.” Breakdowns overwhelmingly favor white male actors for leading roles, leaving only a small proportion of roles open to actors of color or to women. This brief explores the legality of discriminatory breakdowns, looking in particular at the gap between the broad promise of equal employment in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the reality of continuing exclusionary treatment within the film industry. It examines the potential for lawsuits based on Title VII’s equal employment opportunity provisions and offers recommendations for viable alternatives.To download brief by Russell Robinson, click here.
Not Quite A Breakthrough: The Oscars and Actors of Color, 2002-2012
The Oscar nominees this year include two black women who are favored to win: Viola Davis, nominated for Best Actress, and Octavia Spencer, nominated for Best Supporting Actress. Another actor of color, Demián Bichir, a Latino, was a surprise nominee for Best Actor. This scenario recalls 2002, when Halle Berry and Denzel Washington won Academy Awards for Best Actress and Best Actor in a year that also included Will Smith’s nomination for Best Actor and Sidney Poitier’s receipt of an honorary Oscar for lifetime achievement.
To download brief by Russel Robinson, click here.
A Comment on Bank of America/Countrywide's Discriminatory Mortgage Lending and Its Implications for Racial Segregation
Federal regulatory failure may bear responsibility for intensified racial segregation of metropolitan areas, a new commentary by Warren Institute Senior Fellow Richard Rothstein suggests.
On December 21, Bank of America settled (for $335 million) a U.S. government complaint that its Countrywide subsidiary had systematically discriminated against African American and Hispanic mortgage borrowers. Rothstein’s commentary argues that state and federal bank regulatory failure shares responsibility for discrimination practiced by this bank and others, and has contributed not only to racial segregation throughout the 20th century, but to contemporary declines in exposure of minority families and their children to the majority society and economy.
To download brief, click here.
Improving Juvenile Justice Policy in California: A Closer Look at Transfer Laws' Impact on Young Men & Boys of Color
Jennifer Lynn-Whaley and Andrea Russi at Berkeley Law's Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law & Social Policy take a deeper look at juvenile transfer laws in California, exploring the circumstances under which they evolved, how they impact youth of color, and whether they indeed improve public safety and reduce recidivism. This policy brief includes recommendations and examples of promising approaches.
To download brief, click here.
Realignment: A Bold New Era in California Corrections
This policy brief provides Dr. Barry Krisberg’s observations on the realignment in the California criminal justice system. Beginning on October 1, 2011, AB 109 requires that counties, rather than the state, will be responsible for newly convicted offenders who are deemed to be non-violent, non-serious and non-sex offenders. Counties will also take over supervision of state parolees whose last offense was not violent or a sex offense, and low-risk parole violators. The brief provides a brief overview of the reasons for realignment, its challenges, and key steps for making local plans a success.
To download this publication click here.
CalRealignment.org website
Cutting Off the Flow: Extraterritorial Controls to Prevent Migration
This new report highlights and explains the increasing use of offshore immigration barriers and checks to prevent the arrival of migrants and asylum-seekers into the EU and the United States. While much attention has been given to individual extraterritorial mechanisms, such as maritime interdiction, this brief considers a range of other mechanisms being used on both sides of the Atlantic, such as offshore detention, visa requirements and diplomatic agreements. As well as potentially preventing asylum-seekers from reaching safety, the author, Eleanor Taylor-Nicholson, argues that extraterritorial controls generally lack transparency and oversight mechanisms. The paper offers recommendations for review of extraterritorial control laws, policies and agreements to ensure that those who require protection receive it.
To download this publication click here.
Redistricting:
The list of briefs
- Redistricting: Determining the Judicially Acceptable Use of Race in the Redistricting Process
To what extent can line drawers, legislators, and grassroots organizers, consider race in the redistricting process? This paper will analyze the permissible use of race in the redistricting process. In doing so, it will discuss recent Supreme Court cases and the necessity to comply with federal law, specifically in the Voting Rights Act. Statewide redistricting in California will be presented as an example. - Redistricting: Influence Districts – A Note of Caution and a Better Measure
When discussing how best to draw districts to protect minority voting strength, some commentators and courts suggest that minority voters would be better served by decreasing the number of majority-minority districts and increasing the number of minority influence districts. Unfortunately, “influence districts” have been loosely defined and have yet to be sufficiently empirically determined. This research brief examines past judicial definitions of “influence districts,” identifies their shortcomings, and posits a new empirically based standard that line drawers can use to identify presumptive influence districts. - Redistricting: Coalition Districts and the Voting Rights Act
How should redistricting line drawers deal with increasingly diverse populations, especially in situations where no single minority group is large enough to constitute a majority in a district? What information needs to be considered when deciding whether more than one minority group should be drawn together to form a majority of a district in compliance with the Voting Rights Act? This research brief will consider the legal and evidentiary issues at play when considering the drawing of minority coalition districts and present an analysis of inter-ethnic voting patterns in several recent California elections as an illustration.
- Redistricting: Estimating Citizen Voting Age Population
When determining how to draw electoral districts in a way that complies with the Voting Rights Act, many jurisdictions will need to consider proportions of citizen voting age population (CVAP). While the US Decennial Census captures basic demographic information about all individuals in the United States, it doesn’t inquire into citizenship status. As such, line drawing officials will need to estimate CVAP through other means. This research brief explains Census Bureau data sources, including the American Community Survey, which estimates CVAP, but has some limitations for redistricting use. The brief then explains a method to use ACS and Census data in conjunction to develop more accurate CVAP estimates that are better for redistricting uses than ACS estimates alone.
Redistrictinggroup.org
The Warren Institute is a partner in the Redistricting Group at Berkeley Law. The Redistricting Group was created to provide information, training and technical assistance for redistricting in California. The Redistricting Group's website provides information and educational materials geared toward interested members of the public. This includes topics such as redistricting requirements, California’s Citizens Redistricting Commission, and how individuals can provide information about their communities of interests and neighborhoods to line drawing officials.
Redistrictinggroup.org website
Getting the Genie Back in the Bottle: California’s Prison Gulag by Barry Krisberg
The California prison population pushed past 172,000 in 2006, even though it rarely exceeded 30,000 during most of the 20th century. In fact, as late as 1976, the inmate population was just above 20,000 (NCCD, 2008). While there are several reasons for this phenomenal growth in the prison population, there is little doubt that changes in sentencing laws enacted by the Legislature or passed through voter initiatives fed the ever larger correctional leviathan. Crime rates actually declined between 1991 and 2000; crime rates have remained low since the mid-1990s.
Barry Krisberg, Getting the Genie Back in the Bottle: California’s Prison Gulag, in Hogajushinop, Fujimoto Tetsuya sensei koki kien ronbunshu, 5-31 (Chuodaigakuhogakukai 2011).
To download this publication, click here.
The Long and Winding Road: Juvenile Corrections Reform in California by Barry Krisberg
This paper provides some general observations on the successes and challenges faced in implementing the reforms of the California Division of Juvenile Justice (formerly known as the California Youth Authority (CYA)). This year California Governor Jerry Brown has proposed the complete closing of the DJJ with funding going to the localities to manage the remaining youthful offender population. California is on track to be the first U.S. state to close all of its state juvenile facilities.
To download this report: click here.
Free Movement and Equal Rights for Low-Wage Workers? What the United States Can Learn From the New EU Migration to Britain by Jennifer Gordon.
The United States fills the lowest-wage ranks of its labor market with immigrants. Even in the wake of a global recession, once thought likely to result in a high level of return migration, a staggering 7.8 million undocumented workers remain in the labor force. Over 200,000 low-wage guest workers labor on farms and in short-term jobs, tied by law to the employer that sponsored them. Advocates and scholars have long maintained that the way low-wage labor migration to the United States is structured encourages abuse. Both immigrants and resident workers would be better off, the argument goes, if migrants had greater mobility and full and enforceable workplace rights. Author Jennifer Gordon examines this claim in light of Britain's experience with an influx of workers from Eastern Europe under new EU rules and offers insights for lessons for the United States.
To download the report, click here.
