Justice “cost points”

• Author: Tyler Smith,Alexes Harris,Emmi Obara
• Date: 01 May 2019
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12442
• Published date: 01 May 2019

DOI: 10.1111/1745-9133.12442

RESEARCH ARTICLE

JUSTICECOSTPOINTS

Justice “cost points”

Examination of privatization within public systems of justice

Alexes Harris Tyle r Smi th Emmi Obara

University of Washington

Correspondence

AlexesHarris, Depar tment of Sociology,Uni-

versityof Washington, Box 353340, Seattle,

WA98195-3340.

Email:yhar ris@uw.edu

Research Summary: In addition to outsourcing the man-

agement of correctional facilities, many local and state

authorities contract with private companies to provide a

variety of services and processes within U.S. courthouses,

jails, and prisons. In this article, we explore the various

“cost points” at which individuals who make contact with

public systems of justice are chargedby private entities. We

provide two case studies with an in-depth look at how pri-

vate companies make money within U.S.justice facilities—

court-ordered programs and prison services.

Policy Implications: Through our examples, we show the

extent to which private companies generate profits within

U.S. systems of justice and the potential impacts of justice

“cost points” on those involved in these systems. We end

by suggesting policy makers more thoroughly explore the

reasons for the privatization of justice system practices

and services and develop transparent oversight to ensure

private arrangements do not impose undue burdens on

justice-involved individuals and their families.

KEYWORDS

costs, criminal justice, prison services, private corrections,

privatization

1INTRODUCTION

Discussion about “private corrections” has often been focused on the rising use of private prisons.

Since the 1980s, federal and local governments have increasingly used public money to hire private

corporations to house and manage incarcerated populations. In 2016, 13% of people held in federal

Criminology & Public Policy. 2019;18:343–359. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/capp © 2019 American Society of Criminology 343

344 HARRIS ET AL.

prisons, and 8% of people held in state facilities, were in privately operated institutions. These numbers

increased by 165% and 24%, respectively,from the year 2000 (Kaeble & Cowhig, 2016). This endeavor

has been lucrative. CoreCivic (formerly known as Corrections Corporation of America), one of the

largest private prison management firms in the United States, generated $1.8 billion in total revenue in

2015, which was a 9% increase from 2014 (Corrections Corporation of America, 2015).

Although private prisons rightfully garner much scholarly and public attention, they are only one

aspect of the private corrections industry. In addition to outsourcing the entire management of cor-

rectional facilities, many local and state authorities enter into contracts with private companies for

a variety of services and processes within U.S. courthouses, jails, and prisons. Even though justice

institutions primarily remain public entities, private corporations are running many key justice system

programs and generating large profits from captive populations.

In this article, we explore the various “cost points” at which individuals who make contact with

public systems of justice are charged by private entities. At times these costs are exchanged for actual

services or products; at other times private entities are allowed by local governments to charge people

for the forced management of their bodies and property. After reviewing these various cost points, we

provide two case studies with in-depth examinationof how private companies make money within U.S.

justice systems. In the first, we explore how the city of Seattle contracts out services to monitor and

control people who make contact with the courts. In the second example, we describe the relationship

between the Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC) and a national prison-tech company

called JPay. Companies like JPay regularly contract with local, state, and federal prisons across the

nation to provide services and products to people who are incarcerated.

Our aim is threefold. First, to explore the ways corporations are allowed by local and state juris-

dictions to generate profits within our public systems of justice and the potential consequences for

people forced to make these payments. Second, to begin a dialogue about the ethical considerations

of public entities transferring portions of a tax-funded public good (i.e., the operations of justice sys-

tems) to private corporations. And third, to outline a research agenda for better exploring the various

cost points of the private corrections industry and to examine more effectively the legal, financial, and

justice-oriented implications of these increasing practices.

2PRIVATE “COST POINTS” WITHIN U.S. SYSTEMS

OF JUSTICE

In our review of the various private services that operate within different systems of justice, our findings

highlight the wide scope of these public–private partnerships. In Figure 1, we have outlined three

broad levels of the justice system at which people face costs from private entities (what we call cost

points). These cost points include charges during (1) the court process, (2) incarceration (both pre-

and postconviction), and (3) supervision and/or release. Although individuals may have the choice in

whether to pay for some of these services, in many cases, usage is mandated by the law, cour t order,or

internal practice. Thus, companies gain profit through the forced participation of individuals who are

entangled with the various justice systems in the United States.

2.1 Preconviction court process

Private cost points begin almost immediately upon interaction with systems of justice. These moments

that follow arrest or citation are when people are faced with financial charges related to court processes

and predetention in jail. People who are arrested have the choice to seek out a private defenseattor ney;