incarceration – UAB Institute for Human Rights Blog

How Stigma Hurts Series: Opium and Chinese Repression

By Eva Pechtl

Samuel Walker proposes that America has two crime problems, one affecting most white, middle-class Americans and another affecting mostly people of color in poverty. Racial bias has been expressed in drug policy for centuries and has not ceased to marginalize certain racial and ethnic minorities. Chinese immigrants have been historically discriminated against in the United States and have not ceased to face racism in everyday life, especially after being associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Bias has not only affected drug policy over time, but drug policy has reiterated this bias.

Stigma refers to a negative attitude toward a particular group of people, which is usually unfair and leads to discrimination. Stigma can be both explicitly expressed, like thinking people with mental health conditions are dangerous, and subtly embedded in societal norms, like repeatedly showing people of certain groups in the media in negative situations. Labeling someone in a positive or negative way is an easy solution to avoid the toll of understanding the challenges they are experiencing. Stigma is hugely based on social identity and perception of other groups, in that negatively stigmatizing other groups can be a way to justify inequalities in one’s own privilege compared to others.

Understanding stigma toward other social identities is especially important in the context of historical and present drug policy. In this series of blogs, I will explore some important historical examples of how stigma against minority groups has been embedded in American drug sentiment. Throughout this series, I will review the opium trade and Chinese repression, the criminalization of marijuana and Mexican immigrants, the unequal playing field of the hippie counterculture movement and the Indigenous Peyote movement, and the controversy over racial disparities in crack and cocaine sentencing. I hope to offer new perspectives on how targeting and incarcerating drug users has resulted in challenges specifically for minority groups, and how stigma hurts in the criminal justice system.

Outlining the Opium Wars in China

An early point to recognize in the development of drug prohibition was the Opium Wars in China and their effects on the criminalization of Chinese immigrants, especially in the US. This example importantly impacted policies on opiates, the term for the chemicals found naturally and refined into heroin, morphine, and codeine. These variations are derived and created from opium, a depressant drug from the sap of the opium poppy plant. Opioids can refer to both naturally derived opium and its variations synthetically made in the laboratory, like oxycodone and hydrocodone (partly synthetic) or tramadol and fentanyl (fully synthetic). As a medication, opium is meant to be used for pain control, but smoking opium causes euphoric effects almost immediately since the chemicals are instantly absorbed through the lungs and to the brain. The coming of opium smoking to the US created very toxic discrimination by those in privilege against Chinese immigrants, leading to blatant policies against Chinese people in poverty, even when the opium frenzy that followed was far from their goal.

The cultivation of opium increased substantially after the Opium Wars strongly shifted China's economy. — An image of a woman and two children picking the opium poppy fields grown in Old China around 1900. Source: Yahoo Images via Flickr. The cultivation of opium increased substantially after the Opium Wars strongly shifted China’s economy.

In the 1700s, opium poppy fields in India were conquered by the British Empire and smuggled into China for profit. Even though China banned the opium trade in 1729, the illegal sale of the drug by outside nations caused an addiction epidemic and devastating economic consequences. In the Opium Wars, the Qing Dynasty attempted to fight against opium importation, but the British consistently gained more power over trafficking and forced China to make the opium trade legal by 1860. China had imported tea through the East India Company to Britain for many years, but it no longer appealed to Britain’s trade options, and this was detrimental to trade. As Britain ran out of silver to maintain the tea trade, the East India Company found that opium could be sourced in bulk from China, which led to a growing and promising market. The East India Company did not initially create the demand for opium but found a way to maximize the economic disruption and addiction in China for the benefit of trade.

Opium was then trafficked increasingly and was effectively destructive to the Chinese. For example, for the British to get their fix of caffeine, the Chinese got their fix of opium. The drug was sold and medicalized to merchants around the world, notably America, which played a significant role in finding new sources of supply from China and expanding the opium market until 1840. In Chinese culture, smoking opium was initially a ritual luxury that was used to display privilege, but as it became more accessible, the government was less concerned with controlling its pharmacological effects and more with controlling the social deviance associated with it. The Opium Wars ended in an unequal trading arrangement in Europe’s favor, continuing importation and causing the market to become socially segmented. Depending on their wealth, people bought different varieties of opium. However, addiction did not discriminate by wealth.

Judging Drugs by Culture

When many Chinese immigrants came to the US in the mid-1800s, primarily to escape the social and economic devastation brought upon them by the Opium Wars, they were an easy scapegoat for US politicians to blame for the internationally emerging opium crisis. Opium smoking, as well as poverty, was popular among them, so many started businesses of their own, including Opium Dens. These were hidden places to smoke without social consequences, popular in San Francisco, and were typically run by Chinese immigrants, though people of all backgrounds could be found there. These dens were compared to sin and hell, which only increased the already pervasive anti-Chinese sentiment. There was popularity in claims that vulnerable white women who entered the dens were manipulated and their honor surrendered by Chinese men. Males made up 95% of Chinese immigrants in the late 19th century, working for the few available jobs amid the great depression, leading to strong discriminatory sentiment among Americans affected by unemployment, such as referring to cheap laborers as ‘opium fiends.’

An image of two men inside an opium den run by Chinese immigrants in San Francisco in 1898. Source: Yahoo Images via Flickr. Opium users sit and lay relaxing on the floor of a small and organized Opium Den, wearing traditional Chinese clothing and smoking the drug through a pipe next to a tray of materials.

A drawing of an opium den with several Chinese men appearing delirious and their surroundings unclean. Opium Dens were commonly perceived as disgusting places when many were well-kept and included people of different backgrounds. Source: Yahoo Images via Uncyclopedia. Several Chinese immigrants sit beside each other inside a dark and smoky Opium Den, some of them passed out or laid back.

Chinese people were at first welcomed by some Americans as “the most industrious, quiet, patient people among us,” by a California newspaper in 1852. Still, tensions rose at the same time that immigrants started impacting opium use and the workforce. Policies on opium reflect xenophobia and racism, perpetuating fear of the ‘yellow peril,’ a racist color metaphor in American campaigns disguised as ‘anti-drug.’ To further conceptualize racism in politics during this time, the California Supreme Court case People v. Hall in 1854 categorized several racial and ethnic minorities as lacking the progress or development to testify against White people. Even if states did not blatantly pass these laws, Chinese people would be dismissed as liars before even speaking for themselves. This pervasiveness made it impossible for Chinese immigrants to seek justice against the severe discrimination and bias of the drug wars or practically any repressive measures they were subjected to. With the completion of the railroad in 1869, thousands of Chinese people were out of work, denied access to jobs, and targeted as competition as soon as they began to succeed.

With the quote "the Chinese must go," an American figure with long legs labeled 'the Missouri Steam Washer' chases away a Chinese man representing the competition of immigrant businesses. The fleeing man clutches a stool and a container of opium. — An image of a political cartoon describing the exclusion of Chinese immigrants, pushing them away from San Francisco back to China. A Chinese man flees from the American market competition while clutching a stepping stool and a container of opium. Source: Yahoo Images via History1700s. With the quote “the Chinese must go,” an American figure with long legs labeled ‘the Missouri Steam Washer’ chases away a Chinese man representing the competition of immigrant businesses. The fleeing man clutches a stool and a container of opium.

By the 1870s, it became apparent that many individuals, including white people, were picking up on opiate addiction. Opium use had increased alarmingly by the 1880s across the American medical field as well, and this led to criticism of Chinese immigrants by people who saw their fellow Americans as plagued by a disgusting habit. When more others were associated with Chinese people in this way, the criminalization of Chinese people represented a shift in focus toward protecting the perceived integrity of white people. For example, the San Francisco Opium Den Ordinance in 1875 made it illegal to maintain or visit places where opium was smoked, so many Chinese people and their neighborhoods were criminalized. Essentially, the US passed the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, which was the first major federal legislation to explicitly restrict immigration for a specific nationality. This meant pushing Chinese people away from the US even when they were producing the backbone of American railroad labor and only making up 0.002% of the population at that time.

A group of US Marshals stand close by a pile of opium and smoking materials to be burned on a busy Chinatown street while hundreds of people surround and watch. — An image of US Marshals burning opium and opium pipes resulting from an Opium Den raid in the middle of a crowded Chinatown street. Source: Yahoo Images via FoundSF. A group of US Marshals stands close by a pile of opium and smoking materials to be burned on a busy Chinatown street while hundreds of people surround and watch.

Parallels of Criminalization and Overprescription

The Smoking Opium Exclusion Act in 1909 continued to ban the possession, use, and importation of opium for smoking, being the first federal law to ban the non-medical use of a substance. Even though opioids were rampantly prescribed and available in America by this time, the criminalization only applied to smoking opium, primarily done by Chinese immigrants in Chinatowns. Contrary to assumptions, it is not illegal drug cartels but pharmaceutical companies that fueled the opioid epidemic. For example, many Union soldiers in the Civil War returned home addicted to opium pills or needing treatment only possible by hypodermic syringes, which had become widely overused by both doctors and addicts due to their powerful relieving abilities. Male doctors prescribed morphine for women’s menstrual cramps, and it was even infused into syrup to soothe teething babies who became addicted. This was known as the ‘Poor Child’s Nurse,’ since the drug often led to infant death by starvation when sold as a medicine to calm hungry babies. In a broad sense, depending on or relating to one’s racial or ethnic community, opioids were regulated differently.

When narcotic sales were banned in 1923, this forced many addicts subjected to this overprescription to buy illegally from the thriving black markets, especially in Chinatowns, again criminalizing Chinese people. Countless doctors warned and panicked over the rising commonality of addictiveness in opiates as early as 1833, and opium was rapidly synthesized by scientists all over the world into more dangerous variations. When problems with addiction to medicalized opioid variations spun out of control, the US blamed Chinese immigrants rather than consulting with the professional field to avoid harm in the irresponsible dispersion of highly addictive drugs. Instead of dispersing research on the new and dangerous variations, opium smoking was specifically centralized, with opium being generalized into street names like ‘Chinese molasses’ or ‘Chinese tobacco.’

The narrative of opioid addicts was changed when opioid abuse rose among white people, and by this, I mean both the attitudes toward addiction and the actions taken to solve it. Framing addiction as a disease rather than a disgusting crime came when it was no longer just people of color getting in trouble. The idea of pharmaceutical treatments for drug abuse came when it was white people suffering and dying from the opioid epidemic. Meanwhile, opium ordinances had a heavy burden on the incarceration and continued detainment and deportation of Chinese people in the United States especially before accurate research was done. Repression was tied to opium but also purposely deprived Chinese immigrants of opportunities to succeed and created criminalized reputations among their communities. Despite its age, the history of the Opium Wars and its impact on societal discrimination in America is not a point to be missed when considering drug stigmatization.

Factors Affecting Poverty in Alabama

by Jordan Price

A child with no shoes, pink pants, and a light pink jacket sits on a red, blue, and yellow hard plastic toy. She is in a backyard surrounded by gray dirt, trash, and other junk. Her face is dirty, and her hair is messy. — Financial stress in the home can have negative psychological effects on young children. Source: Yahoo Images

One day, in the cafeteria of my small-town Alabama high school, my friend asked if I could sneak some extra snacks from the cafeteria as I went through the line, “Anything that I can put in my backpack for later.” I wondered why her question was asked so defeatedly but brushed it off as her just wanting some extra Rice Krispies treats. So I hid an extra snack in my pocket and grabbed a banana that I knew I wasn’t going to eat. As we sat down, she reached deep into her pockets and pulled out packs of carrots, an orange juice, two Rice Krispies treats, and an apple, quickly shoving it all in her backpack. I handed her what I had gotten and I didn’t ask any questions. This went on for the rest of the semester and it gradually became clearer that her love for Rice Krispies was not the driving force. Her mom had lost her job, and she had suddenly been hit with something that over 16% of Alabamians are facing: poverty.

In this article, I will lay out some aspects of Alabama’s society based on my research that may correlate to the economic disparity of the state.

Cultural Emphasis on the Free Market

Because of the biodiversity of the state and the emphasis on agriculture, many people have found success and stability in small-scale agricultural labor. When the main means of production in a community are small, family-owned-and-operated farms, most people in society have access to the means of production. Small farmers tend to pay their workers well and keep prices fair in order to compete with the many other small farms. Customers are willing to pay a fair price for the products because they trust that it is good quality due to the competition. This is how many communities in rural Alabama have historically operated, and it has fostered a strong sense of hospitality and community. This research from Auburn University in 1987 shows the cultural perception of farming and agriculture in Alabama at that time. Many people supported small family farms over larger, more industrialized farms. Many of these small farms were focused on manual, hands-on labor, wherein the employees worked closely with the means of production and saw the outcomes of their labor. This is why many people in the South hold onto values of a completely free market, with little regulations on employment, wages, and worker protections. When I mention the “shift in the industry,” I am referring to the shift from hands-on labor working directly with the Earth’s resources to more industrialized factory work and white-collar office jobs.

When the means of production become larger and farther removed from the laborers, this type of economic setup becomes an issue. The shift in industries in which Alabamians make money has privatized the means of production and reduced competition. People now are more likely to work indoors in offices, factories, and businesses, far removed from the means of production of the goods and services that they facilitate. This shift has led to many of the problems of an industrialized unregulated system to show themselves in the economic struggles of Alabamians. Employers are farther removed from their employees, meaning they are less likely to directly see all of the work being done by them. Also, under an industrialized free market, salary and wages are often set by huge company employers with little to no competition. Many people must accept these lower wages or be unemployed, making no wages. This is not to say that the free market is necessarily bad. In many ways, Alabama still relies on small businesses and agriculture. There are many ways in which the free market is fundamental to the rights we enjoy, but when a market like this gets into the hands of greedy employers with little regulations on the minimum wage and maximum workload they can give to their employees, it can be used to contribute to the economic struggles of the working class.

Cardboard boxes full of bright orange peaches sit on shelves. The boxes read "Headley's Big Peach. Chilton County I-65 Exit 212. Located under Alabama's largest peach." There is a sign saying, "$9.99 per box, Do not mash on peaches." — In Chilton County, where I am from, the economy still relies heavily on farming, particularly peaches, which play a huge role in the culture of the county. Farming in Chilton County still maintains many of the good qualities that I mentioned in the first paragraph of this section. Source: Yahoo Images

In Alabama, many people have the attitude that if they earn their money or belongings through work, then they deserve to hoard all of the benefits of it. The “bootstraps” view of work is heavily valued in Southern culture, which has its benefits, but ultimately fails to bring fair wages and labor conditions to the middle class post-industrialization. By the “bootstraps” view of work, I am referring to the saying that one can or should “pull themselves up by the bootstraps” when they are of lower economic class. This promotes the idea that working hard is the best way to move up in one’s socioeconomic class; however, people can be of lower economic class for a multitude of reasons, not limited to merely work ethic. This view of work rarely has the intended effect in industrialized fields. It also often excludes people with disabilities whose work opportunities are limited. Watch this Tedx Talk, where Antonio Valdés explains the logistical issues with this view and the statistics surrounding the issue. Additionally, in a strictly free-market worldview, it is often hard to justify social welfare programs, since funding for them must come from the hard-earned tax dollars of people who claim that they deserve their money, and go to people who they claim do not. Although this view does encourage people to work hard and pull their own weight in society, this system can often be manipulated to benefit a few people while pushing a large portion of the population underneath the poverty line.

Education

Another factor that is affecting the wealth of Alabamians is the education system. Alabama consistently ranks in the bottom half – mostly in the bottom 10 – of states in every area regarding education. This article puts some numbers to these statistics. There is no doubt that education correlates to economic mobility, and the education that Alabama students are receiving does not prepare them to compete in a national – much less international – job market. With the industrialization of the workforce, it is important that Alabama puts more resources into improving the quality of our education system if we want to grow economically.

During my research, I came across an article titled Alabama’s Education System was Designed to Preserve White Supremacy – I Should Know. It explains the history of the education system of Alabama and how – rather than designing schools for students to flourish through knowledge – the designers of the system were preoccupied trying to push a white supremacist political agenda. Effects of this can still be found in Alabama’s K-12 education system today, making Alabama school history and social studies curriculum a battleground of political ideologies rather than a place where children can gain a better understanding of their society. I highly recommend giving this article a read, as it was incredibly informative and helpful in my understanding of the pitfalls of the education system in which I was raised.

Slavery, Segregation, and Civil Rights

For many of its first decades, Alabama’s economy was fully held up by unpaid enslaved Black laborers. The soil in this region was the perfect conditions for cotton to be grown, so cotton, along with tobacco, were the main crops that were produced by these laborers. Once the Emancipation Proclamation was carried out in Alabama, the economy took a big hit. Rather than blaming themselves for not working “labor wages” into their finances, plantation owners blamed the formerly enslaved people for not working for free anymore. Slavery grounded our state’s history directly into the soil of race-based hatred, prejudice, and power imbalances from which we have never recovered. Segregation immediately followed emancipation and lasted for 91 years. Following this, Alabama was a significant site for the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 60s. In Selma, an event called Bloody Sunday occurred when a group of police officers used whips, clubs, and tear gas to attack protesters. In Montgomery, Rosa Parks notably refused to give up her seat to a white man, for which she was arrested. In Birmingham, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” one of the most famous pieces of writing from this movement. Still today, Alabama is one of the most socially segregated states in the United States.

It is unsurprising that a state so steeped in racism would have such a large percentage of people in poverty. When entire groups of people live in an area but cannot work certain jobs, access an equal education, earn equal wages, or make big purchases, the entire area suffers. Economies are reliant on the ability of people to participate in them, which is the reasoning behind stimulus checks. If people don’t, or can’t, make or spend money, a free-market economy will not be strong. Not only are people of color in Alabama denied from higher-paying jobs at a much higher rate, but when they do get these jobs, they are often paid significantly less than their white counterparts. This economic inequality leaves entire communities impoverished, more likely to find themselves without a house, and more likely to commit petty crimes for survival. This creates a harsh cycle of poverty, imprisonment, and stereotyping that is incredibly difficult to escape.

Mass Incarceration

All it takes is a quick search on the Institute for Human Rights Blog to see just how many posts have been written about Alabama’s prison system. Anybody unaware of the prison crisis would think that we are beating a dead horse. They would be shocked to hear about the horrors occurring in prisons right down the road from where many of these posts were written. Maybe then, they would understand why we write so much. Because of the wealth of information on this topic, I will link a few articles written by my colleague Kala Bhattar here if you would like to learn more:

The Ongoing Alabama Prison Crisis: A History

The Ongoing Alabama Prison Crisis: From the Past to the Present

It is not a stretch to link mass incarceration to poverty. Recidivism rates (the rate at which people who have spent time in prison return to prison) are high in Alabama. Roughly 29% of people released from prison re-offend within the first three years. The Alabama government seems to attribute this statistic to these people being morally depraved, that they are just “bad people” (whatever that means) rather than to the fact that their needs are not being provided for. The classic example of the link between poverty and crime is a parent stealing bread to feed their family, when the only other option is to go hungry. Technically, stealing is a crime, but most people would agree that the parent who steals bread for their kids should not be punished as harshly as someone who steals for other, more selfish reasons. Of course, poverty does not totally excuse or account for all crime, but there is no doubt that necessity mitigates moral culpability.

A graphic labeled “Incarceration Rates: Comparing Alabama and Founding NATO Countries.” The graphic is made of 13 horizontal bars representing the number of people per 100,000 that are incarcerated in each place. The first two bars, representing Alabama and the United States, are so long that they extend outside of the graphic. The specific numbers per place are as follows: Alabama - 938. United States - 664. United Kingdom - 129. Portugal - 111. Canada - 104. France - 93. Belgium - 93. Italy - 89. Luxembourg - 86. Denmark - 72. Netherlands - 63. Norway - 54. Iceland - 33. — Alabama has a seven times higher incarceration rate than any founding NATO country, excluding the United States. Source.

This is not an extensive list of reasons why Alabamians are having the amount of economic struggles that they are having. Some others include: political polarization, excessive legal fines and fees, the fentanyl and opioid crisis, and the social disenfranchisement of pretty much every minoritized group. As an Alabamian, it is incredibly upsetting to see my state fall short in so many ways. It often feels like there is not much to be proud of, but it is important to remember that pride in one’s homeland does not mean blindly defending everything about the state. Pride in one’s homeland comes from genuinely caring for the communities that live here, criticizing the government when warranted, and guiding the culture to a more harmonious place. And caring, criticizing, and guiding is what we will do until our state sees better days.

Why Our Criminal Justice System Is Working So Well

The justice system is working perfectly. It’s doing exactly what it was designed to do.

The withholding of information by prosecutors violating the Brady Rule, the failure to investigate other potential suspects, and a lawyer who failed to follow a potential alibi are some ways that the justice system convicted Adnan Syed of the murder of Hae Min Lee. Adnan spent 23 years in prison after a jury found him guilty of the murder of his ex-girlfriend. His sentence was recently vacated, and DNA evidence exonerated him. AFTER MORE THAN TWO DECADES! What went wrong? The jury believed that he was guilty, which means that the jury was convinced that he murdered her. So how come he is now walking free after 23 years?

First, let’s look at Maryland’s Attorney General Marilyn Mosby and what she had to say. In her press release, she stated that since the prosecutors failed to turn over evidence for two other suspects which could have changed the course of the trial, the Brady Rule was violated. So what is this Brady Rule that keeps coming up? This rule goes back to the case Brady v. Maryland in which the Supreme Court “requires that prosecutors fully disclose to the accused all exculpatory evidence in their possession”. There is also the fact that there was a DNA sample that wasn’t tested until very recently. The third and most important thing is that the prosecution’s evidence relied on two things, one being their ‘key witness’ Jay Wilds and the other being the cell phone data that backed up Jay’s confession of helping Adnan bury Hae’s body. While AT&T published a notice – during the trial – that incoming calls are not reliable information to pin a location, the prosecution still used this as evidence, stating that even if the witness lied, the data doesn’t. This is now considered controversial evidence as the data isn’t truly reliable. Other than the cell phone data and Jay’s testimony, the prosecutors had nothing. With all of that presented to Baltimore City Judge Melissa Phinn by State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby and the Sentencing Review Unit, Judge Phinn granted the motion to vacate the conviction of Adnan Syed. The judge gave the state of Maryland the option of proceeding with a new trial within 30 days of such ruling (the 30 days has since passed and he is now presumed innocent due to the DNA testing that was FINALLY done).

All this happened due to the publicity from the hit podcast “Serial” and the help of other criminal justice reforms that happened in Baltimore. After 23 years, Adnan is free. But what about the cases that do not get public attention through a podcast or other publicity for that matter? How many others, just like Adnan, are convicted due to the violation of the Brady rule? Or for simply not investigating other potential suspects? A new study done by the National Registry of Exonerations states that of wrongful convictions in 2020, 54% were due to “misconduct by the government”, 34% due to misconduct by the police, and 30% due to misconduct by prosecutors. According to Georgia’s Innocence Project, 1 out of 20 criminal cases “results in a wrongful conviction”. This goes against the advice of one of America’s founding fathers, Benjamin Franklin: “it is better a hundred guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer.”

Why are we neglecting this advice? Many lives are being stolen due to wrongful conviction of crimes that are small yet heavily punished or thrown into prison as a result of these shortcuts the Justice system takes. Often these injustice acts are directed towards black and brown individuals where America is the leading prison population due to the country’s way of approaching punishment which “often lacks a public safety rationale, disproportionately affects minorities, and inflicts overly harsh sentences”. America, unlike other countries, uses prison as a “one-size-fits-all solution to crime”, which means America prosecutes people who are not a public safety problem and often punish those people in a harsher and more damaging way than is truly justified. When did this start? Mass incarceration has been a huge problem in America since the civil war, however, we saw a huge rise in the prison population in the 1970s after Nixon’s “war on drugs” campaign which mostly targeted black individuals. This campaign used both fear and “racial rhetoric” in order to further this ‘movement.’ Under Nixon, we saw a rise in the prison population, however, under Reagan, it was an explosion. When Reagan took office “the total prison population was 329,000” and when he left the population was at 627,000 which is double the starting number. To put it more in perspective, according to the Brennan Center in 2003, for every 100,000 residents, 710 would be incarcerated, and according to the Vera report in 2015, 55% of incarcerated people are either black or brown. This all goes back to the loophole in the 13th Amendment “which abolished slavery and indentured servitude except as a punishment for a crime”, which took effect after the civil war and till now. So there is a a root problem, which is why the justice system is not broken in any way. It was created to harshly convict black and brown individuals. Evidence of such is the data collected in 2010 Prison Policy Initiative study which stated that for every 100,000 residents, 2,306 black individuals are incarcerated versus the 450 white individuals incarcerated.

Now that we established the existence of such issue, what can we so about it? Discussions are taking place and changes too; after the death of George Floyd, many people voiced out their concerns, this pushed “the Center for American Progress, the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and the Draper Richards Kaplan Foundation” to “virtually [gather] 1,000 advocates, researchers, artists, and practitioners for the Innovations Conference, a multiday exploration of what it means to reimagine public safety and shrink the footprint of the justice system.” There is a problem within the roots of the justice system, hence the need to “work to root out the systemic racism ingrained in the criminal justice system” that has affected people of color. This can be established, by starting with ending unnecessarily harsh punishments; for example, “Black Americans are nearly four times more likely to be arrested for marijuana possession and six times more likely to be incarcerated for drug charges than their white counterparts”. Another approach can be taken, by rooting out any racial inequality within the justice system; for example, California passed multiple bills “that will address discriminatory practices within jury selection, prohibit prosecutors from seeking convictions or sentences on the basis of defendants’ race or ethnicity, and lay the groundwork for reparations for the Black community”, and by removing the barriers that affect individuals with a criminal record as it disqualifies these people from “voting, obtaining business or occupational licenses, accessing employment and housing, receiving public assistance, and participating in other key elements of civic life”. Another way of helping is by investing in programs such as “child care and education, access to affordable housing, and other supportive services” since they are proven to create strong and safe neighborhoods. As individuals, we can help by voting, spreading awareness, and simply by putting these issues on the table for discussion. Barriers are destroyed through discussion.

Offender Alumni Association: Protecting and Empowering Previously Incarcerated People

by Mariana Orozco, UAB student

During the Fall 2019 Semester at UAB, Dena Dickerson, the program Director at the Offender Alumni Association, and one of her mentees visited Beth Shelburne’s honors seminar. During their visit, they shared testimonials with students, talked about an organization that they are part of, and closed the session with the man singing to the students. This was a a very emotional class, leaving many students with tears. Furthermore, many of these students were also moved to advocate for those who are in prison or who have been released. Dena, being the program director, has contacted students who have volunteered with the Offender Alumni Association (OAA) and spread the word about it on campus. A couple of students sold Pura Vida bracelets to their peers and were able to raise $150.

Background

OAA is an organization that helps those who have been previously incarcerated. Since its founding date, in 2014, they have impacted over 500 former offenders and their family members. They have been officially named a 501(c)3 nonprofit and launched several support forums in some of Alabama’s and Georgia’s major prisons. The main goals of this organization are to reduce recidivism rates, develop healthy relationships within communities, and provide opportunities for social, economic, and civic empowerment for people coming out of prison.

The Effect of OAA for People

Similarly to the commonly known Alcoholics Anonymous program, OAA offers peer to peer support to help those who are seeking encouragement and support once they are released from prison. An organization like OAA is significant in providing help to people who have been in the same situation as those seeking it. OAA allows a place of honesty without any judgement. Not only are formerly incarcerated people benefiting from this, but OAA is also a place for their families to get resources and network with others who understand their situation. Many times, the focus of the people affected by the prison system is only on those who are incarcerated. However, there are many cases where the most affected is the family. OAA provides a space for these conversations and relationships to occur.

The Effect of OAA in the Community

Mass incarceration is everybody’s issue. Tax payers have to pay and communities have to suffer. As 2020 has brought attention to many people, there are many problems within the prison system. Alabama prisons are overpopulated, understaffed, and underfunded. The 2019 Department of Justice report described Alabama Prisons for Men as unconstitutional because of the guards’ abuse of the people in prison. OAA’s goal is to help reduce the number of people in prison through reducing recidivism rates. Through education and mentorship, they work towards reducing recidivism rates. Although this does not necessarily mean the environment inside prisons will suddenly be good, it would create more living space and reduce the number of people being negatively affected by the system. OAA bridges the gap between “them” and “us” to help bring everyone together and treat people as human beings.

An image of two young boys getting haircuts in a barber shop — OAA takes students from “Heroes in the Hood” to get haircuts. Source: the author

Future Programs

In efforts to further decrease the number of people in prison, OAA is opening a Youth Program. “Heroes in the Hood” took off in the middle of this pandemic. Currently, there are eight students, ages 14 to 18, who are mentored about work ethic and community pride. Dr. Stacy Moak, a Social Work professor at UAB endorsed this program, saying that-“mentoring programs have shown promise in improving the opportunities for these youths to see new possibilities, complete high school, become job ready, and become productive members of society.” This Youth Program hopes to help good students who have been in jail because they do not have resources to help them be successful.

How You Can Help

In order for the new Youth Program to be successful, OAA is working on raising money. This money will be used to provide the students with computers and other school supplies. There are also plans on having engaging events with the student’s mentors to build trust with each other. They are selling OAA colors Pura Vida bracelets for $6. Any other donations can be done through their website. You can also help by educating those around you, sharing this article, or volunteering with this organization.

Photo of Pura Vida bracelets — Green, white, and yellow PuraVida bracelets for the Offender Alumni Association. Source: OAA

Under Pressure: How Court Debts Inform Racial and Wealth Inequality

On Thursday, November 7^th, the Institute for Human Rights co-sponsored an event alongside Students for Human Rights at UAB to present representatives from Alabama Appleseed Center for Law & Justice. During their lecture and discussion with audience members, they addressed how racial inequality and systemic poverty influence court debts as well as what we can do to change the status quo.

Alabama Appleseed, and its 17 other offices across North America, work at the intersection of the legal system and systemic poverty. Helping to confront a system that harms impoverished and minority communities by placing them in an endless cycle of punishment, Alabama Appleseed employs a research and policy reform approach to highlight such inequalities.

They first addressed this issue by covering the racial wealth gap which can be told through the legacy of slavery, convict labor, redlining, school segregation, and hiring discrimination that has economically disadvantaged many communities of color, namely Black Americans. Thus, in present day, the poorest 20% of Whites have an average $15,000 in wealth, while the poorest 20% of Blacks have a mere average $100 in wealth. As a result, receiving a fine can increase existing household costs, develop exorbitant interest rates, and even land one in jail if unpaid, meaning Black Americans are disproportionately affected by the looming threat of court debts.

In response, Alabama Appleseed sought to give this issue greater context by employing a statewide study, titled Under Pressure, which includes personal experiences with court debts from 980 Alabamians representing 41 counties (56% of respondents were Black). Some of the main findings were:

83% gave up necessities like rent, food, medical bills, car payments, and child support, in order to pay down their court debt
50% had been jailed for failure to pay court debt
44% had used payday loans to cover court debt
80% borrowed money from a friend or family member to cover their court debt
Almost 2/3 received money or food assistance from a faith-based charity or church that they would not have had to request if it were not for their court debt

**Alabama Appleseed presenting Under Pressure. Source: UAB Institute for Human Rights**

They went on to address some anecdotal accounts such as people paying someone else’s court debt even though having their own and missing court dates that were scheduled while incarcerated. These findings suggest that impoverished and minority communities in Alabama must maneuver around isolated court systems that don’t communicate with one another, which further places them into a cycle of poverty and looming punishment. Furthermore, Alabama has the 5^th highest incarceration rate in the world and is currently facing a 33% rate of employment in the prison system. This means that our criminal justice system not only disadvantages poor and Black Alabamians, but they are the ones funding these inequalities through a shadow tax system.

Thus, Alabama Appleseed offered a handful of recommendations for state lawmakers to address this system of injustice:

Eliminate court costs and fees, and scale fines to each person’s ability to pay
Fully fund courts from Alabama’s state budget
Send revenue from all court debt to the state General Fund
Create a mechanism for appeal and ensure folks have access to counsel throughout the process
Prohibit the suspension of drivers’ licenses except in instances of unsafe driving
Eliminate Failure to Appear warrants when the individual is incarcerated
Change the law that currently denies voting rights to people who are too poor to pay their court debt
Reclassify the possession of small amounts of marijuana as a civil infraction with fines connected to the defendant’s ability to pay

As demonstrated, Alabama’s criminal justice system is a harvest ground for racial and wealth inequality. However, addressing such concerns at the community-level is one way that you can participate in real change. You can do so by communicating with your local representative about overturning the “Three Strikes Law”, pressuring Regions Bank to divest from the private prison industry, and joining Alabama Appleseed to be informed about pending legislation.

Facing the threat of missing rent, losing meals, and even being incarcerated is no way to live, particularly for those who already experience a list of other disadvantages. For this reason, it’s about time we put our lawmakers and local businesses under pressure.

“Who Are You?” Yusef Salaam of the Exonerated Five Shares His Story

On Tuesday, October 8^th, the Institute for Human Rights co-sponsored an event alongside UAB’s Office of Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion, Student Multicultural & Diversity Programs, and College of Arts & Sciences to present criminal justice advocate Dr. Yusef Salaam of the Exonerated 5 (formerly known as the Central Park 5). During his conversation with UAB’s Dr. Paulette Patterson Dilworth, they discussed his time incarcerated, race in the 21^st century, and the recent Netflix special When They See Us, among other related topics.

In April 1989, following the sexual assault of a white woman in New York City’s Central Park, five young Black and Hispanic youth were convicted for this heinous crime despite inconsistencies in DNA evidence. In the process of weathering the media storm and pressure from local authorities, Salaam claims he had a “spiritual awakening” that was being shaped by the hands of God. About six months into his bid, Salaam was debating if he was doing time or if time was doing him, when an officer approached him and asked, “Who are you?”. After giving the officer his full name, the officer replied, “I know that. You’re not supposed to be here. Who are you?”. This moment changed his entire trajectory because Salaam realized he was born with a purpose. As a result, Salaam earned a college degree while in prison and suggested this accomplishment means he could do anything. He argues that many in the public eye were looking at him with hatred because they saw his future self, an educated Black man fighting for racial and criminal justice.

After serving nearly seven years for a crime he did not commit, a confession and DNA match from Matias Reyes in 2002 allowed the release and exoneration of Salaam as well as Antron McCray, Kevin Richardson, Raymond Santana, and Korey Wise. Aside from Salaam and Wise’s acquaintanceship, the Exonerated Five did not know each other. Due to police profiling, they were rounded up by NYPD, interrogated, and pressured to confess to false narratives about one another, thus having to fight individually for themselves as well as their families. The Exonerated Five never discussed these events among each other because they assumed everyone had the same experience. However, upon a pre-release screening of When They See Us, which Salaam claimed was a “traumatic experience”, the Exonerated Five had the opportunity to process the series of events that would bind them together forever.

Dr. Salaam speaking with Dr. Dilworth. Source: UAB Institute for Human Rights

Although, the story does not end here. As fate would have it, then future U.S. President Donald Trump actively participated in promoting the execution of the Exonerated Five through an ad in local newspapers. Furthermore, Salaam’s claim that President Trump is responsible for “cosigning folks in Charlottesville” suggests our current cultural, social, and political environment encourages racial and criminal injustice. In response, echoing Carter G. Woodson’s treatise “The Mis-Education of the Negro,” Salaam exclaimed that history is trained and taught into a people. As a result, people of color, namely Black Americans, can become so destroyed by a system that they don’t want to participate. Although, Salaam said such a position suggests, “Non-participation is participation.” Thus, we, ourselves, are the answer.

This brings us to how we, particularly white folks who have orchestrated institutions to disadvantage people of color, can be the change we want to see. As Salaam suggests, “The system is working the way it was designed.” Thus, systemic issues disproportionately affecting people of color, such as police profiling, generational poverty, underfunded schools, and weakened voting rights, must immediately be addressed and reformed. Eradicating these injustices will unlikely be in in our lifetime, although current efforts by Black Lives Matter, Innocence Project, The Sentencing Project, and Woke Vote, among many others, shine a light on what we have, and can, accomplish.

Who are you?