Locking up racial bias: States continue to look for ways to reduce disparities in the juvenile justice system.

• Author: Brown, Sarah
• Position: JUVENILE JUSTICE

Minorities have disproportionately outnumbered whites in the nation's juvenile justice system for a long time. In 2010, all minorities combined comprised about 40 percent of the nation's youth, yet they accounted for nearly 70 percent of the population in secure juvenile facilities, according to the Department of Justice's Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

Nationally, custody rates for minority juveniles were 2.8 times higher than for whites, and in 18 states, the minority-to-white placement rate was more than 4 to 1. African-Americans are the most over-represented minority. In 42 states, in 2010, the placement rate for black juvenile offenders into residential correctional facilities exceeded that of all other racial and ethnic groups, according to the juvenile justice office.

Reducing this imbalance is a goal of the federal Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, which requires states to try to eliminate disparities or face losing federal juvenile justice funding. Most states have made that effort, but the reasons these disparities exist are not always easily identified or even acknowledged, and solutions can be elusive. But numerous studies across the country document the problem persists.

Several states and cities are working to narrow the gap by requiring more racial impact analyses and race-neutral assessments, switching to more effective community-based programs, and training correctional and educational staff on cultural differences that may affect juvenile behavior.

Unintended Biases

Oregon lawmakers passed a bill this year requiring that all legislation be screened for language that might result in unequal targeting or treatment of minority youth. It's called a "racial impact statement" and it's a way to look, upfront, for procedures that could have unintended impacts on minorities.

Iowa and Connecticut also have laws that require racial impact statements, while Minnesota conducts comparable analyses, but without legislation.

"Racial impact statements represent a constructive way to address disparities in the justice system," says Marc Mauer, executive director of The Sentencing Project in Washington, D.C. "These policies give legislators the opportunity to address any unintended result of a given law instead of having to amend it later."

When making detention decisions, officers' assessments of how likely a youth will offend often are subjective and have resulted in inequities. Georgia now requires...