Justifying leniency at a time of punitiveness: Federal clemency narratives in the United States

Scholarship on contemporary US penality has paid little attention to practices opposing the punitive trend. This study explores clemency – official acts moderating punishment and its lasting consequences – as an executive back-end mechanism of leniency. To explore how clemency is discussed at a time...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Canossini, Erika (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2023
En: Punishment & society
Año: 2023, Volumen: 25, Número: 5, Páginas: 1334-1352
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Palabras clave:
Descripción
Sumario:Scholarship on contemporary US penality has paid little attention to practices opposing the punitive trend. This study explores clemency – official acts moderating punishment and its lasting consequences – as an executive back-end mechanism of leniency. To explore how clemency is discussed at a time of increasingly punitive penal policies, I conducted a qualitative analysis of 36 years’ worth of presidential statements on clemency from Reagan to Obama. This study revealed that three central justifications are used to validate clemency decisions: individuals’ deservingness, community benefits and justice ideals. Discussions of clemency challenge punitiveness by closing the social distance between individuals with criminal histories and law-abiding society and calling for moderation in punishment and penal reform. However, by using a justificatory tone and mirroring penal rationales, clemency statements are limited in inviting progressive change and at times actively drive and reinforce dominant punitive narratives.
ISSN:1741-3095
DOI:10.1177/14624745231168780