Browsing by Subject "Prisons"

This dissertation charts the history of evangelical Christian influence in American criminal justice and prisons in the second half of the twentieth century. A work of cultural history that draws upon archival sources, newspapers and magazines, governmental records, and interviews, it explores the connection of the dramatic rise in imprisonment and the surge in evangelicalism’s popularity during this period. Evangelicals outpaced nearly all other religious and social constituencies in their interest in crime and punishment. They led the way on all sides of political battles regarding criminal justice and incarceration: some pushed for “law and order,” while others launched reform efforts. They built ministries to delinquents and inmates, revolutionizing prisons’ religious culture. In sum, this dissertation’s central argument is that crime and prison concern are central to evangelical entry into American public life, and that one cannot understand the creation, maintenance, or reform of modern American criminal justice without accounting for evangelicalism’s impact. This dissertation makes two additional arguments about the precise relationship of evangelicalism to mass incarceration. First, evangelicals not only lobbied for policies and voted for politicians that helped build America’s carceral state, they also helped make these changes appealing to other citizens. Unlike much of the previous work on twentieth-century evangelicalism (particularly their influence in politics), this dissertation frames the movement not in terms of backlash or culture warring, but consensus. Postwar evangelicals framed their own religious movement as reputable, racially moderate, and politically savvy, and they helped to do the same for the cause of punishment, bolstering law enforcement’s “neutral” quality, colorblind aspirations, and respectable status. Second, this dissertation argues for the political import of evangelical soul saving, often overlooked by scholars who characterize the movement’s conversionism as individualistic or neglectful of issues of social change. I show how, though unapologetically spiritual in focus, evangelical concern with crime and punishment opened the eyes of some conservative Protestants to the needs of juvenile delinquents and prison inmates, leading them to solidarity with offenders and new forms of reform work.

“Silencing the Cell Block” examines the relationship between imprisoned activists and civil liberties lawyers from the 1960s to the present in order to solve a puzzle central to the United States’ peculiar criminal justice system: Why do American prisons, despite affording inmates expansive due process protections, continue to punish more harshly than their counterparts in any Western country? To answer this question, “Silencing the Cell Block” begins by tracing the emergence of an interracial movement to unionize imprisoned workers in North Carolina and across the nation. Inspired by robust public sector labor and Black Power organizing campaigns, inmates sought a wide range of improvements, including freedom from racism and violence, fair wages, the abolition of large penal institutions, and a voice in prison governance. It then demonstrates how lawyers’ efforts to establish due process protections for prisoners unintentionally undermined inmates’ ability to organize and secure more substantive victories. In the early 1970s, civil liberties lawyers, moved by the broader due process revolution, shielded inmates from the worst abuses behind bars by winning cases compelling prisons to institute disciplinary hearings, grievance procedures, and other procedural protections designed to curtail arbitrary authority. At first, state officials adamantly opposed such improvements. But as the prisoners’ movement garnered strength and courts threatened increased intervention, they came to embrace internal grievance procedures as weapons to defeat inmates’ more sweeping demands. Ultimately, procedural reforms allowed state officials to convince judges that state penal institutions operated as modern bureaucracies that complied with the rule of law. By advocating for new procedural protections that offered the appearance—though not always the reality—of justice, civil liberties lawyers sympathetic to the prisoners’ cause helped make America’s severe prison practices more difficult to dismantle.