Alston

Balance in Structure and Creativity: How Writing Templates Enhance Clarity and Strengthen Arguments

In They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing, Gerald Graff and Cathy Birkenstein provide writing templates designed to help writers engage in conversation by building on or challenging the ideas of others. As the authors state, “Our templates have a generative quality, prompting students to make moves in their writing that they may not otherwise make” (Graff and Birkenstein xxvi). Templates encourage writers to develop their ideas by providing a framework that guides their ideas. Critics argue that writing templates remove individuality making writing less authentic. They Say/I Say counters the false notion, “Critical thinking and writing go deeper than any set of linguistic formulas, requiring that you question assumptions, develop strong claims, offer supporting reasoning and consider opposing arguments” (2). Templates cannot generate ideas, writers must think critically and add creativity, to develop their argument. I believe  templates do not replace original thought; rather, they provide a foundation on which ideas should be built and developed. They Say/I Say writing templates have strengthened my arguments by teaching me how to adapt writing templates to suit my writing, incorporate metacommentary effectively, and eliminate word clutter for clarity. 

Adapting writing templates is beneficial because templates provide a structure while offering flexibility for creativity, allowing writers to balance writing style with rhetorical moves. Templates help writers avoid flat arguments by encouraging them to introduce counterpoints with “They Say” and respond with their own perspectives through “I Say,” creating a conversation. I adapted the “They Say” “I Say” structure in my third essay, where I write, “McMillian is not alone in battling wrongful convictions and their consequences. Between 1989 and 2021, the National Registry of Exonerations recorded 2970 exonerations.” The “They Say” introduces evidence to highlight the scope of wrongful convictions, while the “I Say” is my interpretation that connects McMillian’s case to a broader issue. While the traditional “They Say” “I Say” structure begins with the opposing view to provide context for your argument, I started with the ‘I Say’ because it allowed me to connect my interpretation of McMillian’s case and the larger issue, making my argument more compelling. By adapting writing templates, writers can have structure and be creative, crafting arguments in a purposeful way.

Metacommentary is a rhetorical tool that helps writers clarify their arguments to guide readers toward understanding the connections between ideas. As They Say/I Say explains, “Metacommentary is a way of commenting on your own claims and telling others how—and how not—to think about them” (138). Metacommentary highlights key points leaving readers an understanding about the writer’s purpose and argument. Titles can serve as a form of metacommentary by signaling the focus of the essay. They Say/I Say suggests creating a title with a main topic and a subtitle that uses metacommentary to further clarify the main topic. In my first essay, titled “Humans Should Not Fear Artificial Originality in Writing,” the title was too vague and lacked a clear “because” or “so what.” As a result, my essay title failed to communicate a central argument, leaving readers unsure of what to expect. I improved by creating a title with metacommentary in my second essay, “Fairytale Doorways: Examining Hamid’s Use of Magical Realism in the Fight Against Xenophobia.” The second Essay’s title acts as a blueprint for the essay, outlining the subject, leaving the reader to expect an analysis, and its broader significance. By refining my titles, I learned to use metacommentary to guide readers toward my main ideas and show why they matter.

When writing, They Say/I Say templates help filter out word clutter by encouraging writers to focus on clarity. Instead of relying on complex phrasing to sound sophisticated, templates prompt writers to clearly state their argument and respond to other perspectives. In the essay Politics and the English Language, George Owell states, “Pretentious diction…[is] used to dress up simple statements” (Orwell 3). “Pretentious diction” is unnecessary because it complicates straightforward ideas, laving readers confused. By using They Say/I Say strategies, writers prioritize substance and avoid pretentious language, employing more effective rhetorical moves. Rhetorical strategies ensure that writing remains purposeful without wasting valuable word count. An instance where I should have employed a template in my Essay 2 is when I state, “The novel’s central argument is that ‘we are all migrants through time’ (209). Migration is a shared human experience that extends beyond physical movement to the universal aspects of life across time and experience.” I should have used the They Say/I Say template: “X’s point is not ___________, but rather ___________” (138). I would revise my writing by stating that, Hamid’s point is not that everyone is a literal migrant, but rather that migration is a metaphor for a universal experience through time. My original sentence had word clutter and was confusing to readers because it lacked metacommentary; by revising with the template, readers will have a clearer understanding of my argument. Templates filter out word clutter by providing a framework that clarifies the writer’s argument.

In my own writing, templates have helped me clarify my ideas, eliminate word clutter, and strengthen my arguments, providing a solid foundation for my thoughts. By adapting writing templates, writers can strike a balance between structure and creativity. Naysayers argue that templates limit individuality by imposing confined structures, but I believe that templates actually enhance creativity by offering a framework that guides writers to avoid word clutter and create a clear train of thought. I still need to improve in not relying on expert “They Say” voices in my writing and instead focus on providing a more nuanced perspective through my “I Say.” While templates help organize my argument, I must move beyond summarizing others’ ideas and challenge myself to expand on my original insights that contribute to the conversation. I can improve my originality by responding to experts I disagree with, using counterarguments to further develop my own perspective. Templates offer a powerful tool for clear, focused writing, while still allowing room for individuality and innovation.

I pledge. Alston Riddick

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1blxR-yA4uWxVJtsBOCi0Br8uda27I6FQb3qOtKokcKs/edit?tab=t.0

Work Cited:

Graff, Gerald, et al. They Say / I Say with Readings: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. 5th ed., W.W. Norton & Company, 2021.

Orwell, George. Politics and the English Language. Penguin Classics, 2013.

The Ripple Effect of Wrongful Convictions: A Devastation to Families and Communities

In Just Mercy, Bryan Stevenson tells the story of Walter McMillian, an African American man with no prior criminal record, who was framed for a murder that evidence proved he could not have committed. McMillian’s relationship with a white woman made him a target for racial bias, leading the police department to coerce the original suspect into false testimony about the murder to frame McMillian. The injustice left McMillian feeling hopeless; he cried out,  “My life is ruined! This lie they put on me is more than I can bear” (Stevenson 22). McMillian is not alone in battling wrongful convictions and their consequences. Between 1989 and 2021, the National Registry of Exonerations recorded 2970 exonerations, yet, only 38 states offer financial compensation for wrongfully convicted individuals. In all states, obtaining meaningful compensation requires a costly lawsuit, the state provides no further assistance following exoneration (Massachusetts Bar Association). While financial redress is important, it cannot heal the psychological and familial damage caused by wrongful convictions. Stevenson shows the urgent need for systemic reforms to prevent these injustices and address the lasting harm they cause not only to the accused but also to family and community. Wrongful convictions fracture families and perpetuate helplessness in marginalized communities; the Innocence Project involves families and communities in systemic reforms, taking important steps to stop wrongful convictions.     

Wrongful convictions inflict emotional trauma on families of the convicted, leaving them to endure the consequences of an injustice they had no part in. In her essay, The Relational Costs of Wrongful Convictions, Janani Umamaheswar highlights how families of the wrongfully convicted face financial burdens, social stigma, and emotional pain, noting that they are often “stigmatized, victimized, and ostracized simply by virtue of their association with their wrongfully convicted relative.” Family members are often forced to navigate these challenges without adequate support or recognition of their suffering. As one family member told Stevenson, “I feel like I done been put on death row” (93). Family members often experience a parallel sense of imprisonment, not physically, but emotionally. Umamaheswar asserts that shared suffering only deepens over time as the individual is isolated from the world, “Despite the force of participants’ familial support when they were wrongfully convicted, the sense of solidarity that the men shared with their family members faded over time as many of them endured their prison sentences in relative isolation, sharpening the pain of their wrongful imprisonment terms.” While wrongfully convicted individuals initially experience strong support from their families, solidarity diminishes because of the emotional and physical isolation during their prison sentences. Separation erodes the connection between families and the convicted creating pain for both. Families often believe that release from prison will restore normalcy. Instead, the psychological scars of wrongful conviction continue to impact everyone involved, Umamheswar writes, “Despite the relief and happiness that the men and their families collectively felt at the moment of release and in the immediate days after that, participants realized very quickly that the relational costs that had accrued during their period of wrongful imprisonment would define their post-prison lives.” The “relational costs” refer to the strained relationships and changes in family dynamics that occur during separation, making reintegration difficult. The enduring damage from financial and social stigmatization, separation, and reintegration shows the urgent need for support systems to help families and individuals heal and rebuild their lives after wrongful incarceration.

Wrongful convictions devastate marginalized communities, leaving them helpless against systemic injustices. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, Black Americans comprise 13.6% of the U.S. population but account for 53% of exonerations, with innocent Black individuals being seven times more likely than whites to be falsely convicted (National Registry of Exonerations). The disparity highlights how racial bias amplifies injustice. McMillian was surrounded by members of his poor Black community during the crime, many of whom confirmed his innocence. Yet, authorities disregarded their testimony, revealing a system that dismisses the voices of poor Black Americans. One community member’s anguish is evident, “What do we tell these children bout how to stay out of harm’s way when you can be at your own house, mind your own business, surrounded by your entire family, and they still put some murder on you that you ain’t do” (93). The statement captures the fear and hopelessness felt in communities affected by racial inequality. “They” refers to the police, who employ racial bias and brutality, perpetuating a cycle of injustice. Marginalized communities are not only targeted but also lack the resources needed to fight back. The McMillian family’s statement, “We don’t have any money, we gave it all to the first lawyer” (98), shows the economic toll of wrongful convictions. People in poverty lack the financial means to seek proper legal representation. The current justice system prioritizes wealth over truth. Stevenson describes the collective despair, writing, “Everyone in the poor, Black community who talked to me about the case had expressed hopelessness. This one massive miscarriage of justice had afflicted the whole community with despair and made it hard for me to be dispassionate” (96). These experiences reveal that wrongful convictions are not isolated incidents but communal tragedies, eroding trust in the justice system and perpetuating cycles of vulnerability. McMillian’s community’s helplessness reveals an urgent need for systemic change to prevent further harm and rebuild hope in communities disproportionately impacted by injustice.

The Innocence Project plays a vital role in not only advocating for the freedom of the wrongfully convicted but also in helping them and their families rebuild their lives after exoneration. The Innocence Project’s mission is “to free the innocent, prevent wrongful convictions, and create fair, compassionate, and equitable systems of justice for everyone.” Beyond securing justice, the Innocence Project provides crucial post-exoneration support through initiatives like the Exoneree Fund, which helps pay for housing, medical care, and psychological support, allowing exonerees to regain their autonomy. The Innocence Project works closely with family and community members by offering support groups and coaching, equipping them with resources during and after the exoneration process. One of its notable initiatives is a partnership with The Moth Community Program, which hosts storytelling workshops for exonerees and their families. The Northern California Innocence Project describes these workshops as opportunities where “participants learned how to organize their experiences into compelling narratives, giving voice to the hardships and triumphs of their journey to justice.” These workshops foster a supportive environment, empowering participants to use their stories for advocacy and raising public awareness. By helping exonerees and their families with the exoneree fund and providing the opportunity to share personal narratives, the Innocence Project amplifies voices that might otherwise go unheard. 

The Innocence Project recognizes that their work is only the first step in eliminating wrongful convictions. Systemic changes must be made, The Innocence Project claims,  “Until sweeping changes mandated at the federal level are required, systematic errors will continue and so will wrongful convictions.” It is necessary to address the root causes of wrongful convictions, specifically targeting the impoverished and people of color. The Innocence Project actively seeks to repair from prevention: “We work to transform the inequities and failings that lead to wrongful convictions, alongside policymakers, supporters, and partner organizations.” The Innocence Project has a collaborative approach to addressing systemic injustices; the organization creates a defense against the structural flaws that perpetuate wrongful convictions. The Innocence Project collaborates with legal organizations to address injustices within the system, recognizing racial bias as a key factor in wrongful convictions, and working to create an equitable justice system.

Wrongful convictions not only devastate families but also create helplessness in marginalized communities. The Innocence Project addresses these issues by engaging families and communities in pursuing systemic change. Wrongful convictions take a psychological toll on the incarcerated and their family. The suffering is caused by social and economic stigmatization, isolation, and the difficulty of returning to normality once exonerated. Racial bias within the justice system makes Black Americans more likely to be wrongfully convicted, and a lack of resources in poor Black communities, including the financial means to obtain proper legal representation, exacerbates the disparity. The Innocence Project has made significant progress in supporting exonerees and their families by providing housing, medical care, and emotional support through initiatives like the Exoneree Fund. Additionally, The Innocence Project provides families and exonerees with a platform to share their narratives, giving them a voice to fight wrongful convictions. The Innocence Project also battles the causes of wrongful convictions by advocating for systemic reforms alongside policymakers and community organizations. Systemic changes are essential to create a justice system that is equitable for all. Ending wrongful convictions is not only a legal imperative but also a moral one, because justice and protecting the fundamental rights of all people are at stake.

I Pledge,

Alston

Works Cited and Consulted

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. Tenth Anniversary edition., New York : The New Press, 2020.

Chokshi, Niraj. “Race Bias Is Found In Wrongful Convictions.” New York Times, vol. 166, no. 57530, Mar. 2017, pp. A11–A11.

“Exoneree Network: Community Impact, June 2023-2024.” New England Innocence Project, 2 June 2024, https://www.newenglandinnocence.org/innocence-blog/2024/6/exonereenetworkupdates.

Gross, Samuel R., et al. “Race and Wrongful Convictions in the United States 2022.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2022, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4245863.

Haimson, Chloe. “Redemption Performance in Exoneration and Parole: Two Pathways Home.” Qualitative Sociology, vol. 45, no. 2, June 2022, pp. 241–69, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-021-09495-y.

“Innocence Project.” National Association for Civilian Oversight of Law Enforcement, https://www.nacole.org/innocence_project. Accessed 29 Nov. 2024.

“Innocence Project: Exoneree Fund.” Innocence Project, https://innocenceproject.org/exoneree-fund/. Accessed 5 Dec. 2024.

“Innocence Project: Race and Wrongful Conviction.” Innocence Project, https://innocenceproject.org/race-and-wrongful-conviction/. Accessed 12 Nov. 2024.

“Innocence Project: Transforming Systems.” Innocence Project, https://innocenceproject.org/transforming-systems/. Accessed 12 Nov. 2024.

IP – Key Provisions.Pdf. https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Documents/IP%20-%20Key%20Provisions.pdf. Accessed 2 Dec. 2024.

Jenkins, Siôn. “Families at War? Relationships between ‘Survivors’ of Wrongful Conviction and ‘Survivors’ of Serious Crime.” International Review of Victimology, Feb. 2014, https://doi.org/10.1177/0269758014521739. Sage UK: London, England.

“More Than Advocates: How the Innocence Project’s Social Work Team Supports Exonerees Reclaiming Their Autonomy.” Innocence Project, https://innocenceproject.org/more-than-advocates-how-the-innocence-projects-social-work-team-supports-exonerees-reclaiming-their-autonomy/. Accessed 3 Dec. 2024.

Stevenson, Bryant. Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. First edition, New York : Spiegel & Grau, 2014.

“Storytelling Workshops.” Northern California Innocence Project, https://ncip.org/storytelling-workshop/. Accessed 4 Dec. 2024.

“The Psychological Consequences of a Wrongful Conviction and How Compensation Statutes Can Mitigate the Harms”Spring Symposium: Connected-Vehicle Techonology and the Law”.” Michigan State Law Review, https://www.michiganstatelawreview.org/vol-2021-2022/2022/4/25/the-psychological-consequences-of-a-wrongful-conviction-and-how-compensation-statutes-can-mitigate-the-harms. Accessed 25 Nov. 2024.

Umamaheswar, Janani. “The Relational Costs of Wrongful Convictions.” Critical Criminology, Feb. 2023, pp. 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10612-023-09684-x.

Wrongful-Conviction-Compensation-Fact-Sheet.Pdf. https://www.massbar.org/docs/default-source/advocacy/innocence-initiative/innocence-resources/wrongful-conviction-compensation-fact-sheet.pdf. Accessed 5 Dec. 2024.

“Can you bold any use of passive voice?” ChatGPT, version number 4, OpenAI, December 6th, https://chatgpt.com/c/67532ea5-ed2c-8008-884f-8b2ad7872ec0.

Veyane December 2nd:

Hiiii, sorry for the late comment. All of your points and topics for your essay are very well thought out and planned. They flow together well and are consistent. The main thing I believe you should look at and focus a bit more on is your introduction. Rather than paraphrase the McMillian case, lead with the phrase “these people have broken our hearts” and emotional connection. Use the parts of McMillan’s case to drive your message across. The parts about how it affected the community and how he was falsely accused, and then find a transition that leads into the rest of your essay. I believe this would make your essay and especially your introduction a tad strong. Also, watch out for certain descriptions, “an African American with a good reputation,” can sound a bit victimizing. Rather keep it neutral, such as, “an African American man,” well-loved, well-known, etc. Him being framed already tells us that he is an innocent citizen and good reputation citizen. The rest of the story tells the emotion, so highlight those.

Will November 22nd:

Hey Alstin, I really liked what you did with this essay. This essay had a very clear thesis which made me understand your “why?” in this passage. Along with that I really liked how you used a real life reaction that wrongfully convicted people have which engaged me emotionally. One thing that could possibly make the essay better would be if you used those emotional examples later in the passage and made the nature of wrongful convictions early on in the passage. This could make it stronger since it is laying out the facts which allow people to create an opinion if they agree or not, followed up by something to get their emotional appeal even greater.

Wrongful convictions disproportionately impact marginalized communities, particularly due to systemic issues within the criminal justice system. Walter McMillian, an African American with a good reputation, was framed for a murder that evidence suggested he couldn’t have committed. His relationship with a white woman made him a target for racial bias, the police department coerced others to give false testimony in respect to the murder in order to frame McMillian. Bryan Stevenson, who took on McMillian’s case, provides insights into the emotional toll wrongful convictions take, not only on the individuals but also on their families and communities. In his book Just Mercy, Stevenson describes the resilience of McMillian’s community despite their immense suffering. During a visit to introduce himself to McMillian’s family, Stevenson is struck by the strength and love surrounding McMillian. A woman from the community heartbreakingly expresses their pain, stating, “We don’t have much…but you have someone we love in your care. Anything we have, you have. These people have broken our hearts” (99). This quote captures the profound emotional devastation wrongful convictions inflict. It highlights the vulnerability and hope of a community deeply affected by systemic injustice. The phrase “these people have broken our hearts” shows how McMillian’s conviction is not just a personal tragedy but a wound inflicted on an entire community. Their willingness to offer everything they have to aid Stevenson reflects their desperation for justice and their humanity in this injustice.This emotional toll reveals the broader consequences of wrongful convictions, as they fracture families, destroy trust in legal institutions, and perpetuate helplessness in marginalized groups. The embedded racism within the criminal justice system directly contributes to the wrongful convictions of Black Americans; addressing this issue requires systemic reform rather than relying on case-by-case solutions

Black people are more likely to be wrongfully convicted due to systematic racism rooted in history, causing the use of unethical legal practices. Post-emancipation, rather than fostering freedom, the United States implemented policies and produced flawed statistics to criminalize Black communities and maintain social control. As historian Elizabeth Hinton explains, “Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, flawed statistical data overstated the problem of crime in African American communities and produced a distorted picture of American crime as a whole” (24). This ‘distorted’ portrayal of crime in African American communities laid the groundwork for punitive policies that, while avoiding explicit references to race, disproportionately targeted these populations through expanded surveillance and policing. Hinton further explains, “Without evoking race explicitly, the White House and Congress then built a set of punitive policies that focused on controlling this group by expanding the field of surveillance and patrol around them (13).” With heightened surveillance, it becomes clear that African Americans are more susceptible to be arrested, and by extension, more likely to be convicted wrongfully. While these unethical surveillance practices largely affect the African American community, it’s notable to say, that any impoverished urban area, despite race, is also implicated in this issue. Another significant contributor to wrongful convictions is police misconduct, which disproportionately targets people of color in heavily policed communities. Such misconduct often goes unchecked due to a lack of transparency and accountability within law enforcement agencies. Most states keep police disciplinary records confidential, making it difficult to assess patterns of misconduct or ensure officers are held accountable. According to the National Registry of Exonerations, “Police misconduct contributed to 43% of the wrongful convictions that resulted in exonerations since 1989.” The finding that police misconduct contributed to 43% of wrongful convictions since 1989 reveals a systemic failure in law enforcement. The reason for police misconduct contributing to the problem of racism is due to racial profiling. Racial profiling targets individuals based on race rather than evidence, leading to biased investigations, coerced confessions, and misidentifications that affect marginalized communities. Together, these factors create a justice system that disproportionately subjects Black people to wrongful convictions, exposing them to the devastating consequences of unjust incarceration.

Data consistently shows that Black Americans are significantly overrepresented among those wrongfully convicted, highlighting deep racial disparities within the criminal justice system. The National Registry of Exonerations concludes, “Black people are 13.6% of the American population but 53% of the 3,200 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations. Judging from exonerations, innocent Black Americans are seven times more likely than white Americans to be falsely convicted of serious crimes.” This statistic proves the racial biases affecting every stage of the justice process, from arrest to trial and sentencing. Advances in DNA technology have revealed the extent of wrongful convictions, with many exonerations exposing the racial disparities in the justice system, as Black Americans are disproportionately impacted by these injustices. Organizations like the Innocence Project address wrongful convictions on a case-by-case basis, “The Innocence Project is a national litigation and public policy organization dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted individuals through DNA testing” (Innocence project). Their work has not only freed 251 innocent individuals but has also exposed the profound racial disparities in wrongful convictions. “To address the disproportionate and unjust treatment that leads to the wrongful conviction of Black and brown people, the Innocence Project is committed to strengthening police and prosecutorial accountability” (Innocence Project). Individuals can take actions by donating to the Innocence Project as well as spreading awareness about wrongful convictions, specifically due to racism. The work of advocacy groups alone, however, is insufficient to fix the inequities within the justice system. The racial disparities revealed by exoneration statistics demand urgent reforms to ensure equality. Without such systemic changes, the justice system will continue to disproportionately harm Black Americans, denying them the fundamental rights and protections that should be guaranteed to all. 

Addressing wrongful convictions requires significant policy reforms aimed at eliminating systemic racism and reducing the surveillance of marginalized communities. In returning back to the racial reasonings for wrongful convictions mentioned previously, it is vital to undo these practices. Reforms must also address the misuse of surveillance technologies, which often target Black and low-income communities, further perpetuating systemic injustices. Lawmakers must implement policies that regulate and limit discriminatory practices such as racial profiling. Additionally, police departments should adopt transparency measures, such as requiring body cameras, publicizing disciplinary records, and holding officers accountable for misconduct. By enacting laws that protect individuals from these invasive practices, the justice system can begin to dismantle structural racism and rebuild trust with marginalized communities. Another solution to mitigate wrongful convictions, is increased funding for defense attorneys, this resolution will stop wrongful convictions all together for people of all races. Galvin Almanza, writer for The Hill, agrees public defenders are, “Deprived of resources, investigatory staff and more, they’ve been denied the tools they need to stand between wrongful prosecution and the ultimate horror of wrongful conviction.”  By strengthening the quality of legal representation, the justice system can better protect against errors that lead to wrongful convictions. By addressing systemic racism, improving the quality of defense representation, and curbing prosecutorial misconduct, the criminal justice system can take meaningful steps toward reducing wrongful convictions. These reforms not only protect individual rights but also uphold the fundamental principles of justice and equality.

In conclusion, wrongful convictions are an injustice that disproportionately affects Black Americans due to systemic racism within the criminal justice system. Historical inaccuracies, police misconduct, racial profiling, have created a system that perpetuates inequality, causing permanent harm on individuals, families, and communities. While organizations like the Innocence Project work tirelessly to address these injustices, the root causes demand comprehensive policy reforms. By dismantling discriminatory practices and improving defense representation, society can move toward a justice system that is equitable. Ending wrongful convictions is not only a legal imperative but also a moral one, because justice and protecting the fundamental rights of all people are at stake.

I pledge

Alston Riddick

Bibliography:

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. Tenth Anniversary edition., New York : The New Press, 2020.

Chokshi, Niraj. “Race Bias Is Found In Wrongful Convictions.” New York Times, vol. 166, no. 57530, Mar. 2017, pp. A11–A11.

Galvin-Almanza, Emily. “To Prevent Wrongful Convictions, Invest in Public Defense Solutions.” The Hill, 18 Dec. 2021, https://thehill.com/changing-america/opinion/586305-to-prevent-wrongful-convictions-invest-in-public-defense-solutions/.

Gross, Samuel R., et al. “Race and Wrongful Convictions in the United States 2022.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2022, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4245863.

Howard, Simon. “Exonerees in Black and White: The Influence of Race on Perceptions of Those Who Falsely Confessed to a Crime.” Psychology, Crime & Law, vol. 25, no. 9, Oct. 2019, pp. 911–24, https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2019.1597091.

“Innocence Project: Race and Wrongful Conviction.” Innocence Project, https://innocenceproject.org/race-and-wrongful-conviction/. Accessed 12 Nov. 2024.

“Innocence Project: Transforming Systems.” Innocence Project, https://innocenceproject.org/transforming-systems/. Accessed 12 Nov. 2024.

Rafail, Patrick, and Margaret Mahoney. “A Long Road to Freedom: The Exoneration Pipeline in the United States, 1989–2015.” Sociological Quarterly, vol. 60, no. 4, Fall 2019, pp. 537–58, https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2018.1547175.

Smith, Earl, and Angela Hattery. “Race, Wrongful Conviction & Exoneration.” Journal of African American Studies, vol. 15, no. 1, Mar. 2011, pp. 74–94, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12111-010-9130-5.

Stevenson, Bryant. Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. First edition, New York : Spiegel & Grau, 2014.

I am investigating wrongfully accused felons, specifically due to racism. A person who was convicted of a crime and later is declared innocent of that crime, or relieved of all legal consequences of the conviction because evidence of innocence that was not presented at trial required reconsideration of the case (U Mich Law). Bryant Stevenson approaches the topic of wrongful convictions with an emotional appeal to the reader. Stevenson cites first hand experience with Walter McMillian, Stevenson firstly ponders McMillian’s case, “But there was no evidence against McMillian there was no evidence except that he was an African American man involved in an adulterous interracial affair which meant he was reckless and possibly dangerous even if he had no prior criminal history and a good reputation” (34). Stevenson reviews that the evidence of McMillian’s innocence could not be more concrete, yet all evidence was ignored by the officials. Stevenson expands by giving insight to the feelings of McMillian himself as well as his families. Michigan Law characterized the racial undertones of wrongfully convicted, “Black people are 13.6% of the American population but 53% of the 3,200 exonerations listed in the National Registry of Exonerations. Judging from exonerations, innocent Black Americans are seven times more likely than white Americans to be falsely convicted of serious crimes.” Michigan Law views wrongful convictions as a problem which is exacerbated for African Americans due to the underlying racism in mass-incarceration. Michigan Law employs compelling statistics to show that although African Americans are a smaller percentage of the U.S population they represent more than half of wrongful convictions. Organizations namely The Innocence Project, work on a state level to exonerate wrongly convicted. The Innocence Project describes their work as “to free the innocent, prevent wrongful convictions, and create fair, compassionate, and equitable systems of justice for everyone. Our work is guided by science and grounded in anti-racism.” The Innocence Project has made significant headway in causing awareness of wrongful convictions, but to make an overt change to this problem, national reevaluation of the prison system and its underlying racism is necessary.

I pledge

• Alston Riddick

Bibliography:

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. Tenth Anniversary edition., New York : The New Press, 2020.

Gross, Samuel R., et al. “Race and Wrongful Convictions in the United States 2022.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2022, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4245863.

“Innocence Project: Race and Wrongful Conviction.” Innocence Project, https://innocenceproject.org/race-and-wrongful-conviction/. Accessed 12 Nov. 2024.

“Innocence Project: Transforming Systems.” Innocence Project, https://innocenceproject.org/transforming-systems/. Accessed 12 Nov. 2024..

Stevenson, Bryant. Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. First edition, New York : Spiegel & Grau, 2014.

I aim to investigate the false statistics and wrongful convictions that target Black communities, fueling mass incarceration. My goal is to understand how the civil justice system can counteract these racist practices. Hinton characterizes post-emancipation America, “​​In the decades following Emancipation, scholars, policymakers, and social welfare reformers had analyzed the disparate rates of black incarceration as empirical “proof” of the “criminal nature” of African Americans (19).” Rather than producing freedom post emancipation spurred new false statistics aiming to target the black community. Hinton highlights, “Throughout the 1960s and 1970s, flawed statistical data overstated the problem of crime in African American communities and produced a distorted picture of American crime as a whole” (24). Flawed statistics led to heightened surveillance in Black communities, enabling racist systems to target these communities, the practices based on these inaccurate statistics still shape our criminal justice system today. This bias resulted in an alarming amount of wrongful convictions of African Americans. Howard proves, “Black Americans account for 61% of those who have been released from prison through DNA exoneration. In the present study, we explored the influence of race on perceptions of wrongfully convicted individuals who have been exonerated.”By reforming these laws and shifting away from over-surveillance, the justice system can cut down on racially biased convictions, and help restore trust in communities that have been disproportionately impacted. In Just Mercy, Bryan Stevenson delves deeply into the emotional and psychological toll of wrongful convictions, particularly those rooted in racial injustice. Stevenson captures the constant psychological burden that his client Walter McMillan endured, as he was forced to grapple with a justice system that devalued his life because of his race. To undo the harmful practices stemming from inaccurate statistics that fuel disproportionate surveillance in black communities and wrongful convictions of African Americans, it is vital to raise awareness and demand that the civil justice system re-evaluate laws and practices disproportionately targeting Black communities.

• Alston Riddick

Bibliography:

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness. Tenth Anniversary edition., New York : The New Press, 2020.

Chokshi, Niraj. “Race Bias Is Found In Wrongful Convictions.” New York Times, vol. 166, no. 57530, Mar. 2017, pp. A11–A11.

Howard, Simon. “Exonerees in Black and White: The Influence of Race on Perceptions of Those Who Falsely Confessed to a Crime.” Psychology, Crime & Law, vol. 25, no. 9, Oct. 2019, pp. 911–24, https://doi.org/10.1080/1068316X.2019.1597091.

Kann, Mark E. “The Prison and the Gallows: The Politics of Mass Incarceration in America.” American Historical Review, vol. 112, no. 2, Apr. 2007, pp. 551–52, https://doi.org/10.1086/ahr.112.2.551.

Rafail, Patrick, and Margaret Mahoney. “A Long Road to Freedom: The Exoneration Pipeline in the United States, 1989–2015.” Sociological Quarterly, vol. 60, no. 4, Fall 2019, pp. 537–58, https://doi.org/10.1080/00380253.2018.1547175.

Stevenson, Bryant. Just Mercy: A Story of Justice and Redemption. First edition, New York : Spiegel & Grau, 2014.

Hinton, Elizabeth. (2016). From the War on Poverty to the War on Crime. Harvard University Press. 

“This long War on Crime would eventually produce the contemporary atrocity of mass incarceration in America, distinguished by a rate of imprisonment far above other industrialized nations and involving the systematic confinement of entire groups of citizens (Hinton 2).” The War on Crime ultimately led to the modern crisis of mass incarceration, the U.S’s imprisonment rate far exceeds other countries and the mass imprisonment of marginalized groups of the population.

Hinton begins showing that War on Crime came about in response to the civil rights act victories. It highlights the promises of equality and paradoxical punitive crime control measures that followed. The War on Crime shows the irony of criminal justice policies that disproportionately impacted Black communities being enacted during civil rights progress. Hinton cites Alexanders book as successful in bringing attention to the War on Drugs and characterizing mass incarceration as a beast. Hinton believes, however, the War on Drugs is not the root cause of racism through mass incarceration, it’s history stems earlier with the punitive War on Crimes.

Hinton shifts focus on the federal aspect, addressing poverty through the War on Poverty to increasingly correlate poverty as a criminal issue under the War on Crime. The federal government invested more money in law enforcement, in programs like the LEAA, which provided funding to local police forces. These funds were often directed toward increasing surveillance and control in poor Black communities, where crime was framed as a result of cultural difference in these communities rather than a social issue that should be addressed by funding education and rehabilitation programs.

The argument critiques the flawed crime data that shaped national perceptions of crime. The FBI’s data perpetuated a false view of crime in Black communities. These reports influenced the policies of the Nixon administration and other presidents, which focused heavily on urban crime despite evidence that these policies did not reduce crime rates but rather increased law enforcement.Throughout the 1960s to the 1980s, policies under successive administrations became more punitive, with each building upon the previous president’s initiatives. This continuity reinforced a criminal justice system that prioritized control and surveillance over addressing the underlying issues contributing to crime, especially in Black urban areas.

As a result of these evolving policies, Black urban communities became the primary targets of heightened policing, surveillance, and incarceration. These policies laid the groundwork for the modern system of mass incarceration, disproportionately affecting Black communities. It connects these historical shifts in crime policy to the current racial disparities in the criminal justice system, exacerbating poverty and lack of education in Black communities.

The conclusion reflects on the long-term consequences of these policies, emphasizing the failure to address the root causes of crime while escalating the carceral state. The text argues that the criminalization of poverty, particularly in Black communities, not only contributed to mass incarceration but also to a racialized system of social control that persists into the 21st century. The legacy of these policies is framed as an ongoing cycle of surveillance, criminalization, and disenfranchisement that continues to shape American society today.

History is used as a rhetorical strategy to show evolution of federal crime policies and to expose the racial biases in the criminal justice system. By examining the historical development of these policies, from presidential administrations to the War on Poverty to the War on Crime, history is a basis of fact which grounds the argument. Hinton critiques these policies and also shows their implications for marginalized Black Americans.

Hinton characterizes the War on Crime in the 1960s civil rights movement. This historical background serves to show the irony of increasing punitive policies at a time when the U.S. was supposedly making strides toward equality. The juxtaposition of the civil rights victories with the paradoxical escalation of criminal justice policies targeting Black communities highlights the irony between the country’s progressive notions and the actual impact of those policies. This use of history exposes the contradiction between the promise of equality and the punitive actions that undermined it that affects the Black community in the present.

Hinton uses logical reasoning to make the case that the War on Crime and other policies were flawed and racially biased. FBI crime data relied on arrest statistics without accounting for convictions, Hinton demonstrates that crime policies were built on incomplete or misleading information. This leads readers to critically assess the fairness of the policies, showing that they were not grounded in reality but in misguided data.

Forman , James. “Racial Critiques of Mass Incarceration: Beyond The New Jim Crow.” New York University Law Review, Feb. 2012, pp. 21–67. 

“I believe that the Jim Crow analogy neglects some important truths and must be criticized in the service of truth. I also believe that we who seek to counter mass incarceration will be hobbled in our efforts if we misunderstand its causes and consequences in the ways that the Jim Crow analogy invites us to do” (Forman 24). Forman thinks the Jim Crow analogy misses some critical insights and needs re-evaluation. Additionally, to address mass incarceration effectively, relying on the Jim Crow analogy hinders our understanding of its true causes and impacts.

Forman structures his argument by first establishing the context of racial disparities in incarceration, highlighting the severe impact on Black men since the civil rights era. Forman acknowledges the strengths of the analogy, it draws attention to racial injustice and shows mass incarceration’s impacts on Black communities. However, he outlines how the analogy may oversimplify the complex causes of mass incarceration by focusing too narrowly on race and ignoring other contributing factors.

Forman argues that mass incarceration creates a damaging cycle that fails to rehabilitate individuals and, instead, worsens their circumstances. He explains that prisons leave incarcerated individuals without the skills or support needed to reintegrate successfully into society. Rather than reducing crime, this system perpetuates it, as those who are released struggle to find stable employment which they likely did not have before being incarcerated, making them more likely to re-offend. This marginalization extends beyond individual experiences and harms entire communities.

James Forman cites Michelle Alexander’s The New Jim Crow. He appreciates her use of the birdcage metaphor, which illustrates how various systemic factors work together to confine individuals within a cycle of oppression, much like a bird trapped in a cage. However, Forman critiques the book’s emphasis on racial bias, arguing that it oversimplifies mass incarceration. He calls for a deeper analysis in the complexities of mass incarceration

.

D.C. has high incarceration rates among Black residents, D.C. shows the broader issue of mass incarceration. He points to policies like zero-tolerance laws and aggressive policing as key contributors to these rates. Forman shows the impact on families, where imprisonment leads to loss of income exacerbating poverty. D.C. serves as a case study of how local policies intertwine with the challenges of mass incarceration, emphasizing the need for reform.

Forman argues that proponents of the new Jim Crow often avoid discussing violent crime, focusing on the racial injustices of the War on Drugs. He believes this omission is significant because violent crime plays a substantial role in mass incarceration, especially in Black communities. By not addressing violent crime, advocates risk presenting an incomplete picture of the criminal justice system and its impacts. Forman suggests that this narrow focus on drug-related issues detracts from understanding the full scope of crime and the factors contributing to mass incarceration, ultimately limiting the conversation around necessary reforms and solutions to enhance public safety.

Forman argues that mass incarceration is different from Jim Crow because it disproportionately impacts lower-class individuals, regardless of race. While Jim Crow laws targeted Black individuals specifically, mass incarceration affects economically disadvantaged populations, including all races. Forman emphasizes that issues such as poverty and lack of access to education drive incarceration rates, complicating the analogy to Jim Crow. He believes that focusing only on racial aspects risks neglecting class-based inequalities.

Forman points out that the new Jim Crow emphasizes the impact of mass incarceration on Black communities, overlooking the experiences of other racial groups affected by the criminal justice system. He argues that while the disproportionate incarceration of Black individuals is a critical issue, the focus on this neglects that mass incarceration also significantly affects Latinos, Native Americans, and even poor white individuals. This focus limits discussions about the need for reform that considers the experiences of all groups impacted by the system.

Forman asserts that the original Jim Crow era was a horrific system of racial oppression that enforced segregation and denied civil rights to Black Americans, making it incomparable to today’s mass incarceration. While he recognizes serious issues within the current criminal justice system, he believes the brutality of Jim Crow cannot be equated with contemporary challenges. 

In his conclusion, Forman advocates for the abolition of mass incarceration as a necessary step toward addressing issues within the criminal justice system. He argues that simply reforming existing policies is insufficient, a complete rethinking of punishment is required. Forman believes the structures that perpetuate mass incarceration need to be destroyed because it creates a dangerous cycle affecting the impoverished. The abolition of mass incarceration, where communities are empowered to address crime through support and rehabilitation rather than punishment, will create a more equitable society.

Forman uses statistics as a rhetorical device to highlight the severity of mass incarceration. By presenting data on incarceration rates, particularly among Black and lower-class populations, he illustrates the disproportionate impact of the criminal justice system. He cites differences in incarceration rates between Black and white individuals and the rising numbers imprisoned for nonviolent offenses. These statistics enhance the credibility of his arguments and emphasize the urgent need for reform.

Forman uses historical evidence to contextualize mass incarceration and highlight its connections to past injustices. By referencing the Jim Crow era and its oppressive legal mechanisms, he demonstrates how the new Jim Crow of mass incarceration is incomparable. This historical perspective emphasizes the need for reform that addresses the root causes of these ongoing issues in the criminal justice system.

Forman additionally references other texts to enhance his argument. He cites authors like Michelle Alexander, in her book “The New Jim Crow,” which critiques mass incarceration as a racial caste system. By incorporating literature, Forman situates his work within a broader scholarly conversation about race and the criminal justice system. This approach highlights the importance of a nuanced understanding of mass incarceration that includes all affected groups.

I pledge.

A.R

Fairytale Doorways: Examining Hamid’s Use of Magical Realism in the Fight Against Xenophobia

Immigration is a complex journey that encompasses physical displacement and emotional turmoil. I learned about the struggles of immigration by interviewing James Armstrong, a family friend who immigrated alone from South Africa to the United States at age 18. To flee political violence, he accepted a position with a U.S. polo operation, which covered his journey to the States. Once in the U.S., Armstrong lived in a trailer, separated from his family in South Africa, searching for belonging in a foreign place. Armstrong faced an 11-year process to obtain citizenship; relying on his employer’s attorney, and struggling with mounting fees. In our interview, he emphasized that although he faced many obstacles after he arrived, the process is significantly harder for those without money, connections, or fluency in English. In Exit West, Mohsin Hamid uses magical realism to portray immigration through doors that instantly transport people across borders, bypassing many real-world challenges. The effortless transportation in Exit West mirrors Armstrong’s experience because he did not face travel complications as an immigrant, although he faced challenges after his arrival. Nasia Anam argues that Exit West individualizes immigrants’ experiences and offers an innovative alternative to the conventional apocalyptic mass-migration narratives. Conversely, Yogita Goyal critiques Hamid for glossing over the historical context of migration, suggesting that the novel falsely romanticizes the immigrant experience. I contend that Hamid’s use of magical doors symbolizes the irreversible nature of the immigrant’s journey, asserting not only that there is no going back, but by focusing on the post-arrival journey through the immigrant’s perspective, conveying Hamid’s envisioned goal of a world free from xenophobia.

Magical doors represent the permanent transformation of migration as a physical relocation and an emotional break from the past. Hamid shows Saeed’s ambivalence about these doors, capturing the toll of forced migration: “Saeed desperately wanted to leave his city…he doubted he would even come back, and the scattering of his extended family…amounting to the loss of a home” (Hamid 94). Saeed’s inner conflict about the doors reveals his fears of leaving his family, a loss he equates with losing a home. Individuals inhabiting countries in turmoil are forced to leave their homes and families, understanding they will likely not return home, thus highlighting the sacrifice and severed connections inherent in migration. As Nadia and Saeed pass through the doors, Nadia reflects, “It was said in those days that the passage was both like dying and being born, and indeed Nadia experienced a kind of extinguishing”(104). The imagery of life and death highlights that crossing the doors is both a physical and mental rebirth. Nadia’s old life is ‘extinguished,’ she must start over again in an unfamiliar world. Hamid uses magical doors to show the permanence of the immigrant’s journey: there is no turning back to one’s former home or identity. 

In addition to the magical doors, Hamid employs storytelling from the immigrant’s perspective to further delve into the psychological impact of immigration, aiming to dismantle xenophobia. Hamid gives Nadia and Saeed a nondescript religion and country, presenting them as universal figures. Readers connect with the character’s experiences of time, love, and family, highlighting psychological interconnectedness. Hamid also explores relatability through a vignette of a grandmother who lived in the same home her entire life, revealing that despite never physically moving, she’s emotionally changed. The novel’s central argument is that “we are all migrants through time” (209). Migration is a shared human experience that extends beyond physical movement to the universal aspects of life across time and experience.In her essay, “We are All Migrants”: The Refugee Novel and the Claims About Universalism, Goyal criticizes that “Mohsin Hamid transforms the figure of the refugee into an emblem of a universal human” (241). I argue that Hamid’s universalization of the refugee experience fosters empathy and connection for readers. While it is important not to diminish hardships faced by immigrants, Hamid challenges readers to stop viewing migrants as “others” and instead recognize them as humans. Ultimately, Hamid envisions a future where barriers between people are nonexistent because the world is united by a shared humanity.

Critics contend that Hamid oversimplifies the immigrant journey, creating a false reality; however, I argue that his emphasis on the post-arrival experience is essential for deconstructing xenophobia. Goyal critiques Exit West, asserting, “Hamid naturalizes the fact of migration in a way that evacuates the specific historical experience that generates it.” Alternatively, I argue that by focusing on the realities of life after migration, Hamid reveals the emotional and psychological struggles immigrants encounter beyond the journey itself. Hamid’s magical realism disregards overwhelming historical context, highlighting the immigrant experience on an emotional level. Hamid evokes empathy for Saeed and Nadia’s resilience as they rebuild their lives amidst cultural dislocation. He envisions a world where migration represents an opportunity for global unity. Saeed and Nadia coexist with other migrants and build a diverse community. Nadia states, “ [The group] represented something new in her mind…she found these people who were both like and unlike those she had known in her city… and she found their seeming acceptance of her…an achievement in a way (148-149).” Nadia’s post-arrival experience offers familiarity and differences, leading to her sense of belonging in a new community. Hamid shows the complexities of an immigrant’s integration beyond physical relocation to finding identity. Through Nadia’s emotional testimony, Hamid challenges readers not to see immigrants as “others” or sources of chaos. His vision of a world free from xenophobia is transformative, suggesting that the issue is not the movement of people, but the prejudice sparked by the perception of “outsiders.”.

Magical doors represent the permanent transformation of migration, in concentrating on the journey after arrival through the lens of the immigrants, Hamid advocates for a world free from xenophobia. I acknowledge that Hamid could delve deeper into the conflicts of immigrants’ journey rendering the novel more realistic, however, this isn’t necessary because the novel’s strength lies in its ability to explore the emotional and psychological impacts of immigration post-arrival, offering a nuanced perspective on how displacement affects oneself. In evoking empathy, Hamid proves that immigrants shouldn’t be viewed as alien, furthermore, everyone is interconnected through shared experience. Hamid creates a hopeful vision of a future where fear of immigrants is replaced by connection.

Work Cited:

Anam, Nasia. “The migrant as colonist: Dystopia and apocalypse in the literature of Mass migration.” ASAP/Journal, vol. 3, no. 3, 2018, pp. 653–677, https://doi.org/10.1353/asa.2018.0043. 

Goyal, Yogita. “ ‘We are All Migrants’: The Refugee Novel and the Claims of Universalism.” MFS Modern Fiction Studies, vol. 66, no. 2, 2020, pp. 239–259, https://doi.org/10.1353/mfs.2020.0019. 

Hamid, Mohsin. Exit West: A Novel. Riverhead Books, 2018.

Jay Sheridan • Photos by Will Jordan. “James Armstrong: Polo Player Extraordinaire.” Southern Exposure Magazine, 2 Dec. 2017, 

Kakutani, Michiko. “Review: In ‘Exit West,’ Mohsin Hamid Mixes Global Trouble with a Bit of Magic.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 Feb. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/02/27/books/review-exit-west-mohsin-hamid.html. 

www.southernexposuremagazine.com/past_issues/james-armstrong-polo-player-extraordinaire/article_467e45a2-7d92-11e7-9af4-93747b144038.html.

“Test the Fitness of Your Writing – The Writer’s Diet.” Writers Diet, 11 Apr. 2024, writersdiet.com/writing-test/.

Jack:

Alston,

I really like how you use the anecdote about your friend’s father as a hook and as a means to introduce your thesis. That story accurately illustrates your point about the importance of the migrant’s journey after arrival. However, I think some of your evidence in the second paragraph could use more explanation or analysis. In the second paragraph, I can see how your quote about Saeed on page 94 is in the same ballpark as your thesis, but I don’t see a clear connection between Saeed’s feeling of leaving his home forever and the importance of the migrant journey after arrival that you state in your thesis. The same is true for Nadia’s quote in that same paragraph. To help the reader, I think you could add a few more sentences after each quote to explicitly connect the evidence with your thesis.

Also, in your fifth paragraph, you make the point, “Hamid bridges the gap between natives and immigrants by highlighting shared human experiences.” Just to play devil’s advocate, I could argue that Hamid intentionally widens the gap between natives and immigrants, specifically in London. Hamid emphasizes how different the mansion is from Nadia and Saeed’s typical experience, how luxurious the room and the towels are, and how differently the London natives live compared to them. Hamid seems to emphasize the significant cultural gaps between Nadia and Saeed and London natives. Does Hamid bridge the gap or widen the brink between immigrants and natives? That’s just something to think about and could be good fodder for another counter argument claim. I like the direction your essay is headed!

Best,

Jack

Melissa:

I really love your essay and the use of the personal anecdote that adds that “I say” in the whole narrative. Your thesis is clear and compelling and it provides a very strong foundation and you do a great job of provides a very strong foundation thou I feel like the transition between your personal story and thesis is abrupt kind of. you can try separating them to clarify them.

Alexander, Michelle. The New Jim Crow (Penguin Books, 2019)

“This book argues that mass incarceration is, metaphorically, the New Jim Crow and that all those who care about social justice should fully commit themselves to dismantling this new racial caste system (Alexander 14).” The book contends that mass incarceration functions as a modern form of Jim Crow and calls on all who are dedicated to social justice to take action against this new racial caste system.

Alexander starts with the history of mass incarceration in America has roots in the denial of voting rights to African Americans, beginning with Jim Crow laws that enforced racial segregation and limited Black political power, particularly in southern states like Alabama. She then progresses to say, that although progress has been made in the election of President Obama, these achievements often overshadow the deeper, systemic issues that continue to impact Black communities, demonstrating the enduring legacy of racial discrimination within American society.

Then Alexander describes her personal experiences with the justice system that gave her perspective in The New Jim Crow. While working as a civil rights lawyer with the ACLU, Alexander witnessed racial disparities to new extremes she never thought were possible. Her work exposed her to the reality that African Americans are targeted and criminalized, often facing harsh punishments. These firsthand experiences revealed to Alexander how the justice system functions as a means of social control, she claims that the criminal justice system is the most overlooked when discussing present-day racism. 

Alexander examines how the War on Drugs became a catalyst for mass incarceration, disproportionately affecting Black communities. She argues that, under this initiative, sentencing policies targeted African Americans, leading to a dramatic rise in Black incarceration rates. Alexander highlights that, despite similar rates of drug use across racial groups, Black individuals were far more likely to be arrested and imprisoned for drug offenses. She also explores how policies like affirmative action have given the illusion of racial progress, allowing society to overlook the ongoing racial caste system perpetuated by mass incarceration. By focusing on these issues, Alexander contends that the War on Drugs was less about combating crime and more about maintaining social control and racial inequality.

Alexander argues that mass incarceration has created a racial caste system, a structure of social stratification that disadvantages Black Americans. She describes how this caste system operates through laws and policies that criminalize and punish Black individuals. Once labeled as felons, these individuals are denied basic rights and opportunities, including access to jobs, housing, education, and the right to vote, which further these groups in poverty. Alexander compares this to historic systems of racial control, like slavery and Jim Crow laws, showing that while overt segregation may have ended, the legal system has created a new form of racial hierarchy that traps many Black Americans in a cycle of oppression. 

Alexander addresses naysayers who may contend that the book overlooks other racial groups also affected by mass incarceration. Alexander claims that she is focusing on African American men because they are the most affected, but she hopes others will pick up where she left off. Alexander then outlines the book, summarizing each chapter and pointing them to her overall conclusion. 

In The New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander employs dates and statistics By using dates and statistics, she anchors her claims in historical evidence, detailing, for example, the dramatic rise in incarceration rates since the onset of the War on Drugs in the 1980s. These numbers add weight to her assertion that mass incarceration was a deliberate shift rather than an inevitable result of crime, giving readers a clearer picture of how the system disproportionately affects Black Americans.

Alexander’s use of firsthand experience, particularly from her time with the ACLU, offers a personal lens that makes her argument relatable and authentic. Her direct encounters with the justice system and with individuals impacted by it show the human cost of mass incarceration.

To address potential objections, Alexander incorporates naysayers’ viewpoints, acknowledging the arguments of those who believe racial inequality in incarceration is overstated or who cite affirmative action as evidence of progress. By engaging with these counterarguments, she dismantles these points, demonstrating how surface-level progress masks deeper systemic issues. 

noun: hope; plural noun: hopes

1. a feeling of expectation and desire for a certain thing to happen. (red)
   • “he looked through her belongings in the hope of coming across some information”
2. a feeling of trust. (green)
   • “our private friendship, upon hope and affiance whereof, I presume to be your petitioner”

verb: hope; 3rd person present: hopes; past tense: hoped; past participle: hoped; gerund or present participle: hoping

1. want something to happen or be the case. (blue)
   • “he’s hoping for an offer of compensation”

Work Cited:

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/hope_2

Stevenson, Bryan, author. Just Mercy : a Story of Justice and Redemption. New York :Spiegel & Grau, 2014.