Collateral Consequences and Racial Inequality

• Author: Darren Wheelock
• Published date: 01 February 2005
• Date: 01 February 2005
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1043986204271702
• Subject Matter: Articles

10.1177/1043986204271702
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice / February 2005
Wheelock / FELON STATUS RESTRICTIONS
Collateral Consequences and Racial Inequality
Felon Status Restrictions as a System of Disadvantage
DARREN WHEELOCK
University of Minnesota
Studies of the collateral consequences of felony conviction have generally focused on single
restrictions such as disenfranchisement or disqualification for welfare assistance. Although
these studies have provided a wealth of valuable information, such an approach only provides a
partial picture of the broader social context in which collateral sanctions operate and their impli-
cations for social stratification. Even after felons complete their sentences, they often find whole
classes of key privileges revoked and opportunities blocked. Furthermore, because they are most
likely to experience criminal justice sanctions, Black males are at far greater risk of also facing
the social disadvantages that accompany criminal punishment. This article argues that collateral
consequence provisions play a role in maintaining and exacerbating racial inequality.
Keywords: collateral consequences; criminal punishment; racial inequality; social
stratification
TheshifttowardmassincarcerationintheUnitedStateshasledtoanex-
felon population that has grown to levels previously unseen (U.S.
Department of Justice, 2003b). Current estimates suggest that more than 9
million ex-felons, representing 4.6% of the population, 8.0% of the adult
male population, and almost 25.0% of the Black adult male population
(Uggen, Thompson, & Manza, 2000). Researchers are only beginning to
understand the difficulties in attempting to reintegrate millions of ex-felons.
To be sure, ex-felons must frequently overcome a vast array of barriers—
many of which stem from collateral legal restrictions (Petersilia, 2003;
Travis, 2002). This article will explore these consequences and begin to
assess their effect on racial inequality.
“Collateral consequences” or “invisible punishment” are formal policies,
provisions, and laws that impede ex-felon reentry into various social institu-
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 21 No. 1, February 2005 82-90
DOI: 10.1177/1043986204271702
© 2005 Sage Publications
82

---

Wheelock / FELON STATUS RESTRICTIONS
83
tions (Travis, 2002). Whereas these restrictions may adversely affect the
lives of all ex-felons, racial minorities are especially susceptible to collateral
consequences. Such restrictions are therefore salient factors in explaining
recent patterns of racial inequality (see also Mauer & Chesney-Lind, 2002).
Two reasons support this position. First, Blacks are overrepresented in the
incarcerated population (Mauer, 1999; Sampson & Lauritsen, 1997; Tonry,
1995). Nationwide, the rate of incarceration for Black men is more than
seven times the rate for White men (U.S. Department of Justice, 2003a).
Black men have a 28.5% chance of being incarcerated at some point during
their life, an estimate that exceeds 50% among Black high school dropouts
(Pettit & Western, 2004; U.S. Department of Justice, 2003c). Thus, greater
proportional involvement with the criminal justice system leads to greater
felon status restrictions for young men of color than other groups.
Second, Blacks disproportionately face other social disadvantages.
Research in social stratification has established that race and inequality are
inextricably linked in the United States (Darity & Myers, 1998; Massey &
Denton, 1993; Oliver & Shapiro, 1995; Wilson, 1980, 1987, 1996). Black
males, in particular, experience higher rates of unemployment and lower
rates of labor force participation than Whites, two important indicators of
economic well-being (U.S. Department of Labor, 2004). Therefore, any
adverse effect of collateral consequence policies might exacerbate existing
disadvantage by removing the few opportunities of social and economic
stability available to many people of color.
COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES
AS CLASSES OF RESTRICTIONS
According to an American Bar Association (2002) task force report, col-
lateral consequences include disenfranchisement, deportation, loss of pro-
fessional licenses, felon registration, and ineligibility for many welfare bene-
fits (p. 8). Additional restrictions prevent serving on a jury, running for public
office, traveling freely, collecting military benefits, parental rights, possess-
ing firearms, and receiving public assistance. For purposes of this article, I
categorize the restricted behaviors as civic, service and aid, employment and
occupational, and other. Table 1 shows the specific restrictions that fall under
these categories and estimates their potential effect on racial inequality.
Civic Restrictions
Civic restrictions refer to those that impede, infringe, or deny civic duties
and responsibilities afforded...