Minority disproportionality exists at various decision points in the juvenile justice system

Federal requirements on disproportionate minority confinement have changed

In 2002, the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDP) Act broadened the concept of disproportionate minority confinement to encompass disproportionate minority contact at all stages of the system. In 1999, when the data reported here were collected, the JJDP Act required that states determine whether the proportion of minorities in confinement exceeded their proportion in the population. States had to determine the extent of the problem and demonstrate efforts to reduce it where it exists.

Overrepresentation refers to a situation in which a larger proportion of a particular group is present at various stages within the juvenile justice system than would be expected based on their proportion in the general population.

Disparity means that the probability of receiving a particular outcome (for example, being detained vs. not being detained) differs for different groups. Disparity may in turn lead to overrepresentation.

Discrimination occurs if and when juvenile justice system decisionmakers treat one group of juveniles differently from another group based wholly or in part on their gender, race, and/or ethnicity.

Discrimination is one possible explanation for disparity and overrepresentation. This suggests that because of discrimination on the part of justice system decisionmakers, minority youth are more likely to be arrested by the police, referred to court intake, held in detention, petitioned for formal processing, adjudicated delinquent, and confined in a secure juvenile facility. Thus, differential actions throughout the justice system may account for minority overrepresentation.

Disparity and overrepresentation, however, can result from factors other than discrimination. Factors relating to the nature and volume of crime committed by minority youth may explain disproportionate minority confinement. This suggests that if minority youth commit proportionately more crimes than white youth, are involved in more serious incidents, or have more extensive criminal histories, they will be overrepresented in secure facilities even if no discrimination by system decisionmakers occurred. Thus, minority youth may be overrepresented within the juvenile justice system because of behavioral and legal factors.

In any given jurisdiction, one or more of these causes of disparity may be operating. Detailed data analysis is necessary to build a strong case for each causal scenario. However, on a national level, such analysis is not possible with the data that are available. For example, national data use broad offense categories such as robbery, which includes both felony and nonfelony robberies. More severe outcomes would be expected for juveniles charged with felony robbery. Disparity in decisions regarding transfer to criminal court would result if one group of offenders had a higher proportion of felony robberies than another group (since transfer provisions are often limited to felony offenses).

The national data, however, do not support analysis that controls for offense at the felony/nonfelony level of detail. Similarly, although prior criminal record is the basis for many justice system decisions, criminal history data are not available nationally. Thus, at the national level, questions regarding the causes of observed disparity and overrepresentation remain unanswered.

Black juveniles are overrepresented at all stages of the juvenile justice system
compared with their proportion in the population

Figure showing overrepresentation of black juveniles at all stages of the juvenile justice system compared with their proportion in the population, 1998/99 and 1990/91

  • Nationally, for all stages of juvenile justice system processing, the black proportion was smaller in 1998/99 than in 1990/91.

Source: Author’s analysis of U.S. Bureau of the Census’ Estimates of the Population of States by Age, Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 1990–2000 [machine-readable data files] for 1991 and 1999; BJS’ National Crime Victimization Survey [machine-readable data files] for 1991 and 1998; FBI’s Crime in the United States for 1991 and 1999; OJJDP’s Juvenile Court Statistics for 1991 and 1998; OJJDP’s Children in Custody Census of Public and Private Juvenile Detention, Correctional, and Shelter Facilities 1990/91 [machine-readable data files]; and OJJDP’s Census of Juveniles In Residential Placement 1999 [machine-readable data files].

NIBRS study reveals no direct evidence of racial bias in arrests of juveniles for violent crime

The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) data provide information on crime incidents reported to police, including characteristics of the crime, the victim, and anyone arrested for the crime, along with the victim’s perception of the offender. An analysis of NIBRS data by Pope and Snyder looked for evidence of racial bias in the arrest of juveniles for violent crimes. Race was defined as white and nonwhite (including black, American Indian, Asian, and Pacific Islander). Both white and nonwhite racial categories included individuals of Hispanic ethnicity.

The study found that, for violent crimes, no difference in the overall likelihood of arrest of white juveniles and nonwhite juveniles existed after controlling for all other incident characteristics. The likelihood of juvenile arrest was affected, however, by several other incident characteristics independent of offender race. Arrest was more likely when there was a single offender, multiple victims, victim injury, or when the victim and offender were family members (rather than strangers). The odds of arrest also increased when the offender was male and when the victim was an adult or white. Because of the association of these other incident characteristics with offender race, a greater proportion of white juvenile offenders were arrested than were nonwhite juvenile offenders for most person offenses (e.g., robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault).


For serious violent crime, data show that racial disproportionality begins with offending levels

Recent analyses of National Crime Victimization Survey data for 1980 through 1998 compared the rates of offending for black and white juveniles as reported by victims. The study focused on the serious violent crimes of aggravated assault, robbery, and rape because these are crimes in which victims have face-to-face contact with offenders.

Data from victims indicated that the serious violent offending rate for black juveniles is higher than the rate for white juveniles. For 1980–98, the offending rate for black juveniles was, on average, 4.1 times the offending rate for white juveniles. In comparison, the black-to-white ratio of arrest rates for these same serious offenses shows greater disparity than was found for offending. The average arrest rate for 1980–98 was 5.7 times higher for black juveniles than for white juveniles.

For both offending rates and arrest rates, though, the ratios of black to white rates have declined in recent years. From 1992 to 1998, the black-to-white rate ratios were very similar for arrests and offending. On average, black juveniles had arrest rates that were 4.9 times greater and offending rates that were 4.6 times greater than the rates for white juveniles.

Because the analyses included only serious violent crimes, the findings cannot be generalized to nonviolent or less serious offenses for which law enforcement may have considerably more discretion in arrest decisions.


Previous Contents Next

Juveniles in Corrections OJJDP National Report Series Bulletin
June 2004