The Geography of Race and Ethnicity Effects in Federal Sentencing: A Descriptive and Spatial Analysis

• Published date: 01 October 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231186160
• Author: Kelsey L. Kramer,Yan Zhang,Travis W. Franklin
• Date: 01 October 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR, 2023, Vol. 50, No. 10, October 2023, 1431 –1455.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548231186160

Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions

© 2023 International Association for Correctional and Forensic Psychology

1431

THE GEOGRAPHY OF RACE AND ETHNICITY

EFFECTS IN FEDERAL SENTENCING

A Descriptive and Spatial Analysis

KELSEY L. KRAMER

YAN ZHANG

Sam Houston State University

TRAVIS W. FRANKLIN

Washington State University

Research has focused mainly on whether race and ethnicity influence sentencing outcomes. Much less attention, however,

has been paid to where, geographically, disparities occur in the United States. Using the United States Sentencing

Commission’s sentencing data from FY2015 to FY2019, we estimated the effects of race and ethnicity on sentencing out-

comes across 90 U.S. districts. First, we examined whether race and ethnicity varied across districts. Then we mapped dis-

trict-level racial and ethnic disparities across the United States. Finally, we examined whether district-level racial and ethnic

disparities were spatially correlated, creating hot- or cold spots of disparity. Evidence suggests that disparities are not con-

centrated within specific regions of the United States and are not spatially correlated. Instead, racial and ethnic disparities

seem to be somewhat dispersed geographically. Yet, disparities do seem to concentrate in a relatively small portion of U.S.

districts.

Keywords: race and ethnicity; sentencing disparities; federal sentencing; geographic disparities

INTRODUCTION

Sentencing reformers have long sought to eliminate unwarranted racial and ethnic dis-

parities in the application of formal punishment (Frankel, 1972; Tonry, 1997). Sharing in

this motivation, researchers have dedicated considerable effort to examine the nature of

such disparities, and to date, hundreds of studies have attempted to do this (for reviews, see

Chiricos & Crawford, 1995; Franklin, 2018; Ulmer, 2012; Zatz, 2000). To help guide pol-

icy, sentencing researchers have spent the past 20 years clarifying the complex role of race

AUTHORS’ NOTE: We would like to thank the Editors at Criminal Justice and Behavior and the anonymous

reviewers for their constructive feedback and insights. Correspondence concerning this article should be

addressed to Kelsey L. Kramer, Department of Criminal Justice and Criminology, Sam Houston State

University, P.O. Box 2296, Huntsville, TX 77341-2296; e-mail: klk083@shsu.edu.

1186160CJBXXX10.1177/00938548231186160Criminal Justice and BehaviorKramer et al. / GEOGRAPHY OF RACE AND ETHNICITY IN SENTENCING

research-article2023

1432 CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND BEHAVIOR

and ethnicity in punishment outcomes. That is, once it became clear that race and ethnicity

did not always influence sentencing decisions, research efforts coalesced around the need to

determine when (i.e., under what conditions) race and ethnicity mattered (Spohn, 2000).

Much of this literature has revealed that race and ethnicity intersect with other offender and

offense characteristics, such as gender, age, education, crime type, and criminal history

(e.g., Franklin & Henry, 2020; Freiburger & Sheeran, 2020).

Researchers have also come to understand the importance of explaining where racial and

ethnic disparities in sentencing are most prevalent. Along these lines, researchers have recog-

nized that courts are nested within broader communities (Myers & Talarico, 1987), which

themselves, may provide social contexts for understanding whether race and ethnicity take on

significance in punishment decisions (Britt, 2000). This has sparked a growing body of multi-

jurisdictional research that has examined the impact of numerous factors, including proportion

of the Black and/or Latine population, growth in minority populations, crime rates, urbaniza-

tion, and jurisdiction size to name a few. To be sure, this body of literature has established that

race and ethnicity do take on different meanings in different types of communities—in some

communities, Black and/or Latine individuals are sentenced more punitively than their white

counterparts, while in others they are sentenced with parity, or even more leniently (e.g.,

Durante, 2021; Feldmeyer & Ulmer, 2011; Freiburger & Sheeran, 2020; Johnson, 2005; Spohn

& Holleran, 2000; Steffensmeier & Demuth, 2000).1,2 It has also provided clues as to the fac-

tors that may drive variability across communities and their courts. At the same time, however,

this community-level research has overlooked a simpler, but equally important concern: iden-

tifying where race and ethnicity matter from a geographical standpoint.

We believe this shortcoming is important for multiple reasons. First, a motivating force

behind much of this multijurisdictional research, and broadly race and sentencing research,

is to help develop useful policy recommendations for reducing unwarranted disparities. Yet,

in the absence of basic information about the geographic distribution of disparities, it is dif-

ficult to know where reform efforts might be most useful. That is, by initially identifying

which districts have unwarranted racial and ethnic disparities, it provides an opportunity to

create policies and trainings that are targeted toward particular districts and judges. Second,

inspecting the geography of disparities may prove useful for guiding future research on

judicial decision-making. At a minimum, such an approach may identify locations of pro-

nounced disparity that require more investigation to understand the unique dynamics of

race and ethnicity and judicial sentencing decisions.3 Finally, this approach allows us to

examine the spatial distribution of racial and ethnic disparities. Indeed, we can determine

whether neighboring districts cluster in geographical “hotspots” of disparity, which may

suggest that there are specific aspects about these locations, and judicial decision-making

that are similar. As such, judges may sentence racial and ethnic minorities in accordance

with other districts because of their proximity to one another.

To address these issues, the current study relied on federal sentencing data from the

United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) for FY2015-2019. We believe these data

provide a useful starting point for examining the geography of disparities since they provide

information on sentencing outcomes that span all U.S. districts across each of the 50 United

States and the District of Columbia. We seek to answer two questions:

Research Question 1 (RQ1): Where are racial and ethnic disparities most pronounced?

Research Question 2 (RQ2): Do racial and ethnic disparities cluster in certain regions creating

“hotspots” of disparity?