Opponents of Indiana bill, including civil rights groups, raised concerns about racial bias and confusion for officers in enforcing proposed law.
INDIANAPOLIS - Indiana lawmakers are advancing a bill which would require police to notify federal authorities about certain arrests.
House Bill 1393 moved forward after lawmakers made significant changes. It applies when police arrest someone and suspect the person is in the country illegally. Officers must notify the county sheriff, who then informs federal agencies.
The amended version raises the standard from "reasonable suspicion" to "probable cause." It also grants civil immunity to officers who act in good faith.
Rep. Garrett Bascom, R-Lawrenceburg, said the bill balances enforcement with fairness.
"I want to be very clear about the determination," Bascom stressed. "The determination is not made just based off pulling a person off of the street. The determination is only made after an individual has been arrested for that felony or misdemeanor."
Opponents, including civil rights groups, raised concerns about racial bias and confusion for officers. Supporters said the bill strengthens immigration enforcement and addresses human trafficking concerns.
Critics warned it could encourage racial profiling and harm immigrants with legal status.
Carolina Castoreno, executive director of the American Indian Center of Indiana, worries it will unfairly target individuals during arrests.
"I'm here to tell you that if you think this will only impact undocumented people, you are wrong," Castoreno contended. "Historically, this has proven to be false. When they tried to do this in the 1930s, the Mexican Repatriation Act, nearly 2 million people were deported to Mexico and nearly 60% of those people were U.S. citizens."
Lawmakers debated the changes before the vote. Some warned it could disproportionately affect refugees and others without standard documents. Despite objections, the bill continues to move forward.
CHICAGO - Data show troubling disparities on the number of justice-involved individuals within the Illinois Department of Corrections.
Pew Research figures show Black people remain over-represented in jail populations and receive longer sentences.
The John Howard Association is a non-partisan prison watchdog group that monitors the treatment of justice-involved individuals and says change needs to happen at many levels.
Executive Director Jennifer Vollen-Katz said the population of Black people in Illinois is around 14%. For white people, that number is around 68%.
"But when you look at the racial makeup of the population in the Illinois Department of Corrections," said Vollen-Katz, "we find somewhere between 52% and 54% of the individuals inside IDOC are black - and about 32% of the people inside our prisons are white."
Conversations with IDOC workers and administrators are part of JHA's research, and pair with inmates' perspectives and experiences.
Katz said she wants equal treatment in the justice system - regardless of background or race - and a deeper look at law enforcement's relationships with different communities.
She said prosecutors wielding enormous power in making legal decisions is a huge problem in the early stages of the criminal justice system, and said she feels discrimination should be identified at its source.
"The disproportionate representation in our prison system is reflective of the lack of equity throughout our criminal legal and law enforcement systems," said Vollen-Katz, "and so we can't look at any one system to solve the problem. We need to start at the very beginning and do things quite differently if we're going to address this problem."
Katz affirmed that differences in the outcomes of charges, trials, and plea deals in sentencing are additional areas for reform.
She said more information is needed to improve the back end of the justice system - mandatory supervised releases, parole, and early discharge.
A May 2023 study from the anti-mass criminalization group The Prison Policy Initiative shows 28,000 Illinois residents are in state prisons, 17,000 are in local jails, and 6,100 are in federal prisons.
by Jyoti Madhusoodana
In a now-classic series of experiments, researchers teased out the deep-rooted nature of human bias simply by distributing red shirts and blue shirts to groups of 3- to 5-year-olds at a day care center. In one classroom, teachers were asked to divide children into groups based on the color of their shirts. In another, teachers were instructed to overlook the shirt colors. After three weeks, children in both classrooms tended to prefer being with classmates who wore the same color as themselves—no matter what the teachers did.
Photo: Markus Winkler/Pixabay
This preference for people who seem to belong to our own tribe forms early and drives our choices throughout life. There appears to be no avoiding it: We are all biased. Even as we learn to sort shapes and colors and distinguish puppies from kittens, we also learn to categorize people on the basis of traits they seem to share. We might associate women who resemble our nannies, mothers, or grandmothers with nurturing or doing domestic labor. Or following centuries of racism, segregation, and entrenched cultural stereotypes, we might perceive dark-skinned men as more dangerous than others.
The biases we form quickly and early in life are surprisingly immutable. Biases are “sticky,” says Kristin Pauker, a psychology researcher at the University of Hawaii, “because they rely on this very fundamental thing that we all do. We naturally categorize things, and we want to have a positivity associated with the groups we’re in.” These associations are logical shortcuts that help us make quick decisions when navigating the world. But they also form the roots of often illogical attractions and revulsions, like red shirts versus blue shirts.
Our reflexive, implicit biases wreak devastating social harm. When we stereotype individuals based on gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or race, our mental stereotypes begin to drive our behavior and decisions, such as whom to hire, who we perceive as incompetent, delinquent, or worse. Earlier this year, for instance, an appeals court overturned a Black man’s conviction for heroin distribution and the 10-year prison sentence he received in part because the Detroit federal judge who handed down the original verdict admitted, “This guy looks like a criminal to me.”
People who live in racially homogeneous environments may struggle to distinguish faces of a different race from one another.
Correcting for the biases buried in our brains is difficult, but it is also hugely important. Because women are stereotyped as domestic, they are also generally seen as less professional. That attitude has reinforced a decades-long wage gap. Even today, women still earn only 82 cents for every dollar that men earn. Black men are perceived as more violent than white men, and thus are subjected to discriminatory policing and harsher prison sentences, as in the Detroit case. Clinicians’ implicit preferences for cisgender, heterosexual patients cause widespread inequities in health care for LGBTQ+ individuals.
“These biases are operating on huge numbers of people repetitively over time,” says Anthony Greenwald, a social psychologist at the University of Washington. “The effects of implicit biases accumulate to have great impact.”
Greenwald was one of the first researchers to recognize the scope of the problems created by our implicit biases. In the mid-1990s, he created early tests to study and understand implicit association. Along with colleagues Mahzarin Banaji, Brian Nosek, and others, he hoped that shining a light on the issue might quickly identify the tools needed to fix it. Being aware that our distorted thinking was hurting other people should be enough to give pause and force us to do better, they thought.
They were wrong. Although implicit bias training programs help people become aware of their biases, both anecdotal reports and controlled studies
have shown that the programs do little to reduce discriminatory behaviors spurred by those prejudices. “They fail in the most important respect,” Greenwald says. When he, Banaji, and Nosek developed the Implicit Association Test, he took it himself. He was distressed to discover that he automatically associated more positive words with the faces of white people, and more unfavorable words with people who were Black. “I didn't regard myself as a prejudiced person,” Greenwald says. “But I had this association nevertheless.”
His experience is not unusual. The Implicit Association Test (IAT) measures the speed of subjects’ responses as they match descriptors of people (such as Hispanic or gay) to qualities (such as attractiveness, athleticism, or being professional). It’s based on the idea that people react more quickly when they are matching qualities that are already strongly associated in their minds. Implicit bias exists separately from explicit opinion, so someone who honestly believes they don’t have anything against gay people, for instance, may still reveal a bias against them on the test. “A lot of people are surprised by their results,” Greenwald says. “This is very hard for people to come to grips with intuitively.”
People’s beliefs may not matter as much if they can be persuaded not to act on them.
One reason we are so often unaware of our implicit biases is that we begin to form these mental associations even before we can express a thought. Brain-imaging studies have found that six-month-old babies can identify individual monkey faces as well as individual humans. Just a dozen weeks later, nine-month-old babies retain the ability to identify human faces but begin to group all the monkey faces together generically as just “monkey,” losing the ability to spot individual features. Shortly after, babies begin to group human faces by race and ethnicity. Our adult brains echo these early learning patterns. People who live in racially homogeneous environments may struggle to distinguish faces of a different race from one another.
As it became clear how deeply ingrained these biases are—and how they might be unfathomable even to ourselves—researchers began to design new types of strategies to mitigate bias and its impact in society. By 2017, companies in the United States were spending $8 billion annually on diversity training efforts, including those
aimed at reducing unconscious stereotyping, according to management consulting firm McKinsey & Company. These trainings range from online educational videos to workshops lasting a few hours or days in which participants engage in activities such as word-association tests that help identify their internalized biases.
Recent data suggest that these efforts have been failing too. In 2019 researchers evaluatedthe effectiveness of 18 methods that aimed to reduce implicit bias, particularly pro-white and anti-Black bias. Only half the methods proved even temporarily effective, and they shared a common theme: They worked by giving study participants experiences that contradicted stereotypes. Reading a story with an evil white man and a dashing young Black hero, for example, reduced people’s association of Black men with criminality. Most of these strategies had fleeting effects that lasted only hours. The most effective ones reduced bias for only a few days at best.
Even when training reduced bias, it did little to reduce discriminatory outcomes. Beginning in early 2018, the New York City
Police Department began implicit bias training for its 36,000 personnel to reduce racial inequities in policing. When researchers evaluated the project in 2020, they found that most officers were aware of the problems created by implicit bias and were keen to address these harms, but their behaviors contradicted these intentions. Data on arrests, stops, and stop-and-frisk actions showed that officers who had completed the training were still more likely to take these actions against Black and Hispanic people. In fact, the training program hardly had any effect on the numbers.
This and similar studies have “thrown some cold water on just targeting implicit bias as a focus of intervention,” says Calvin Lai, a social psychologist at Washington University in St. Louis. Even if you are successful in changing implicit bias or making people more aware of it, “you can’t easily assume that people will be less discriminatory.”
But researchers are finding reason for hope.
Although the dozens of interventions tested so far have demonstrated limited long-term effects, some still show that people can be made more aware of implicit bias and can be moved to act more equitably, at least temporarily. In 2016, Lai and his colleagues tested eight ways of reducing unconscious bias in studies with college students. One of the interventions they tested involved participants reading a vividly portrayed scenario in which a white person assaulted them and a Black person came to their rescue. The story reinforced the connection between heroism and Black identity.
Other interventions were designed to heighten similar connections. For instance, one offered examples of famous Black individuals, such as Oprah Winfrey, and contrasted them with examples of infamous white people, including Adolf Hitler. Participants’ biases were gauged using the IAT both before and after these interventions. While the experiments tamped down bias temporarily, none of them made a difference just a few days later. “People go into the lab and do an intervention and there’s that immediate effect,” Pauker says.
From such small but significant successes, an insight began to emerge: Perhaps the reason implicit bias is stable is because we inhabit an environment that’s giving us the same messages again and again. Instead of trying to chip away at implicit bias merely by changing our minds, perhaps success depended on changing our environment.
The implicit associations we form—whether about classmates who wear the same color shirt or about people who look like us—are a product of our mental filing cabinets. But a lot of what’s in those filing cabinets is drawn from our culture and environment. Revise the cultural and social inputs, researchers like Kristin Pauker theorize, and you have a much greater likelihood of influencing implicit bias than you do by sending someone to a one-off class or training program.
Babies who start to blur monkey faces together do so because they learn, early on, that distinguishing human faces is more critical than telling other animals apart. Similarly, adults categorize individuals by race, gender, or disability status because these details serve as markers of something we’ve deemed important as a society. “We use certain categories because our environment says those are the ones that we should be paying attention to,” Pauker says.
Just as we are oblivious to many of the biases in our heads, we typically don’t notice the environmental cues that seed those biases. In a 2009 study, Pauker and her colleagues examined the cultural patterns depicted in 11 highly popular TV shows, including Grey’s Anatomy, Scrubs, and CSI Miami. The researchers tracked nonverbal interactions among characters on these shows and found that even when white and Black characters were equal in status and jobs and spoke for about the same amount of time, their nonverbal interactions differed. For instance, on-screen characters were less likely to smile at Black characters, and the latter were more often portrayed as stern or unfriendly.
Thinking of implicit bias as malleable allows us to constantly reframe our judgments about people we meet.
In a series of tests, Pauker and her colleagues found that regular viewers of such shows were more likely to have stronger anti-Black implicit biases on the IAT. But when the researchers asked viewers multiple-choice questions about bias in the video clips they saw, viewers’ responses about whether they’d witnessed pro-Black or pro-white bias were no better than random. They were being influenced by the bias embedded in the show, “but they were not able to explicitly detect it,” Pauker says.
Perhaps the most definitive proof that the outside world shapes our biases emerged from a recent study of attitudes toward homosexuality and race over decades. In 2019 Harvard University experimental psychologist Tessa Charlesworth and her colleagues analyzed the results of 4.4 million IATs taken by people between 2007 and 2016. The researchers found that anti-gay implicit bias had dropped about 33 percent over the years, while negative racial attitudes against people of color declined by about 17 percent.
The data were the first to definitively show that implicit attitudes can change in response to a shifting zeitgeist. The changes in attitudes weren’t due to any class or training program. Rather, they reflected societal changes, including marriage equality laws and protections against racial discrimination. Reducing explicit discrimination altered the implicit
attitudes instilled by cultures and communities—and thus helped people rearrange their mental associations and biases.
Until societal shifts occur, however, researchers are finding alternate ways to reduce the harms caused by implicit bias. People’s beliefs may not matter as much if they can be persuaded not to act on them. According to the new way of thinking, managers wouldn’t just enter training to reduce their bias. Instead, they could be trained to remove implicit bias from hiring decisions by setting clear criteria before they begin the hiring process.
Faced with a stack of resumes that reveal people’s names, ethnicities, or gender, an employer’s brain automatically starts
slotting them based on preconceived notions of who is more professional or worthy of a job. Then bias supersedes logic.
When we implicitly favor someone, we are more likely to regard their strengths as important. Consider, for example, a hiring manager who perceives men as more suited to a role than women. Meeting a male candidate with a low GPA but considerable work experience may lead the manager to think that real-world experience is what really matters. But if the man has a higher GPA and less experience, the manager might instead reason that the latter isn’t important because experience can be gained on the job.
To avoid this all-too-common scenario, employers could define specific criteria necessary for a role, then create a detailed list of
questions needed to evaluate those criteria and use these to create a structured interview. Deciding in advance whether education or work experience matters more can reduce this problem and lead to more equitable decisions. “You essentially sever the link between the bias and the behavior,” explains Benedek Kurdi, a psychologist at the University of Illinois Urbana–Champaign. “What you’re saying is the bias can remain, but you deprive it of the opportunity to influence decision making.”
In the long run, reducing the biases and injustices built into our environment is the only surefire path toward taming the harmful implicit biases in our heads. If we see a world with greater equity, our internal attitudes seem to adjust to interpret that as normal. There’s no magical way to make the whole world fair and equitable all at once. But it may be possible to help people envision a better world from the start so that their brains form fewer flawed associations in the first place.
To Pauker, achieving that goal means teaching children to be flexible in their thinking from an early age. Children gravitate toward same-race interactions by about the age of 10. In one study, Pauker and her colleagues found that offering stories to children that nudged them to think about racial bias as flexible made them more likely to explore mixed-race friendships. In another study, Pauker and team found that children who thought about prejudice as fixed had more uncomfortable interactions with friends of other races and eventually avoided them. But those who thought about prejudice as malleable—believing they could change their minds about people of other races—were less likely to avoid friends of other races.
The key, Pauker suggests, is not to rethink rigid mental categories but to encourage mental flexibility. Her approach, which encourages children to consider social categories as fluid constructs, appears to be more effective. The data are preliminary, but they offer a powerful route to change: simply being open to updating the traits we associate with different groups of people.
Thinking of implicit bias as malleable allows us to constantly reframe our judgments about people we meet—evaluating each unique individual for what they are, rather than reducing them to a few preconceived traits we associate with their race, gender, or other social category. Rather than trying to fight against our wariness toward out-groups, reconsidering our mental classifications in this manner allows us to embrace the complexity of human nature and experience, making more of the world feel like our in-group.
Blurring the implicit lines in our minds might be the first step to reducing disparities in the world we make.
This story is part of a series of OpenMind essays, podcasts, and videos supported by a generous grant from the Pulitzer Center's Truth Decay initiative.
Recent brain studies showing youths do not fully understand the consequences of their actions until age 25.
CHICAGO - Advocates for juvenile justice reform recently gathered in Chicago to find ways to keep young people out of the criminal justice system.
Herschella Conyers, board chair of the Juvenile Justice Initiative, said part of the work needs to happen in schools. If schools were transformed into welcoming neighborhood activity centers, open from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Conyers believes children would see better educational outcomes and stay out of trouble.
"I know that's bold, I know that costs tax dollars," Conyers acknowledged. "But God, aren't we spending tons of money already for the wrong things that have not worked? And the cost of incarcerating a child is not a small cost."
In 2020, Gov. Pritzker announced plans to transform the state's juvenile justice system in four years, by moving incarcerated youth out of adult facilities, increasing wraparound supports and intervention, and boosting financial support for victims. But groups advocating for juvenile justice reform said the work is far from complete.
Joshua Brooks, restorative justice hubs coordinator for the Institute on Public Safety and Social Justice at Adler University, said the work of bringing offenders, victims and community members together to repair harm done is the number one intervention communities want. But young people need to be fully reintegrated into communities, or they just end up back on the streets.
"Restorative justice has been known to reduce recidivism," Brooks noted. "That's true, it does. But also, if a person who exits out the criminal justice system gets a job, and is employed, that reduces recidivism too."
Scott Main, assistant director of the Illinois Juvenile Defender Resource Center, pointed to recent brain studies showing youths do not fully understand the consequences of their actions until age 25. He pointed to states like Vermont, where they are not willing to put juveniles in adult court until they have reached full maturity.
"We should look to Washington D.C. and California that has second-look legislation, looking at sentencing for individuals up to the age of 25," Main urged. "Illinois hasn't done enough, we need to keep pushing forward."
Related articles:
Fining kids by the Illinois criminal justice system needs to end
From my perspective, after 31 years in law enforcement and now as an adjunct professor teaching Juvenile Justice Administration at Wright College in Chicago, failure is when people involved in the justice system are left without the means to create a better future for themselves and their families.
Northern Ireland agency could be a model for US juvenile-justice system
As lawmakers in Illinois and across the nation consider reforms to the nation's juvenile-justice system, one country across the Atlantic could serve as a model.
Northern Ireland's Youth Justice Agency places an emphasis on early diversion, community involvement and restorative justice.
Nearly half of older Americans can’t even afford basic needs
I worked hard my whole career and retired feeling secure. Then I lost every last dime in a scam. I was left with $1,300 a month in Social Security benefits to live on in an area where monthly expenses run about $3,700.
I’m a smart woman, but scams against older Americans are increasing in number and sophistication. Whether through scams, strained savings, or costs of living going up, half of older Americans — that’s 27 million households — can’t afford their basic needs.
I find myself in dire need of sincere counsel, as I am increasingly convinced that my romantic life has taken on the unfortunate semblance of a rom-com wherein I alone remain bereft of the script. I'm 31, will defend my thesis this May, and have a great job lined-up.
My boyfriend, aged 32, embodies the quintessential extrovert—gregarious, enamored with nightlife, and perpetually surrounded by a coterie of approximately twenty friends who reside in close proximity and convene incessantly. Initially, I admired his vivacity and character.
Budget-Friendly renovation ideas to modernize your home
Renovating your home can be affordable with the right approach. Simple changes, like repainting walls or updating fixtures, can create a fresh, modern look without a high price tag. Whether you’re improving outdated spaces or enhancing functionality, these budget-friendly renovation ideas to modernize your home will help you achieve a stylish, updated space while staying within your budget.
Protecting your valuable works of art when you move, here is how
Transporting artwork can feel daunting, especially when it holds significant emotional and financial value. You want to ensure that your cherished pieces arrive at their destination in Illinois without a scratch. This guide will explore expert ways to transport valuable artwork safely. With the right approach, you can protect your investments and preserve the beauty of your art. Let’s dive into practical tips that make the process easier and more secure.
Protecting cherished pets from highly pathogenic avian influenza: A guide for pet owners
As the threat of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) looms over both avian and domestic populations, pet owners face an urgent challenge: protecting their beloved companions from a virus that can turn a playful afternoon into a perilous health crisis. HPAI, primarily affecting birds, poses significant risks to pets, particularly those that may ...
What da funk? A stinky body can be a sign of a health issue
Death, taxes and body odor.
They’re things we can all expect in life, no matter how clean you are. But health care providers want you to know when body odor is a sign of a more serious health problem.
B.O. basics
Luis Garcia, MD, an OSF HealthCare pediatrician, says sweat and bacteria are the main culprits behind body odor. Warmth and moisture in parts of the body (like your armpits and feet), plus going through puberty and general poor hygiene, can make the smell worse.
by Joe Ulery
My boyfriend, aged 32, embodies the quintessential extrovert—gregarious, enamored with nightlife, and perpetually surrounded by a coterie of approximately twenty friends who reside in close proximity and convene incessantly. Initially, I admired his vivacity and character.
