The findings highlight the way in which the social forces of crime rates and politics have different impacts within different political contexts, resulting in varying effects on imprisonment rates. In particular, the research showed that how States responded to civil rights had a lasting impact on imprisonment policies. Results of three case studies in California, New York, and Washington highlight the different ways in which crime policy developed and differentially impacted imprisonment policies. California crime control policy developed out of a sentiment of populism, in which crime control relied on an intensification of confinement to bring about a social order based on exclusion. New York, on the other hand, developed a pragmatic crime control policy that relied on the strategic use of confinement to restore social order with minimum force and maximum legitimacy. Washington, in the final example, relied on participatory governance to link active citizen participation to the maintenance of social order, resulting in a low reliance on confinement. Case study methodology relied on a comparative historical analysis that incorporated a review of new kinds of data, including archival materials such as citizen’s letters to political leaders, transcripts from town hall meetings, internal government reports, and public testimony. Secondary sources were also examined, including statistical data and political histories. Data analysis relied on both temporal and spatial analyses. Notes, references