Is American Justice Truly Blind? Race and the Law
This paper examines whether the American ideal of blind justice is a reality or a myth by exploring how race and socioeconomic status affect the administration of criminal law. It analyzes both political perspectives—conservative and liberal views on crime and its causes—and operational perspectives, specifically the crime control model versus the due process model. The paper evaluates which crime control goals are best achieved under each framework, then assesses whether minorities are unfairly profiled, arrested, and prosecuted in the United States. Drawing on scholarship regarding white privilege and systemic bias, the paper concludes that while justice is not yet truly blind, equitable application of the law remains achievable through deliberate policy reform.
- Introduction: Defines justice and frames the research problem
- Political and Operational Perspectives on Crime Control: Conservative vs. liberal crime control approaches and minorities
- Crime Control vs. Due Process: Competing Models: Two operational models and their civil liberties tradeoffs
- Goals of Crime Control and Which Perspective Achieves Them Best: Political perspective as best path to equitable crime control
- Racial Profiling, Arrest, and Prosecution of Minorities: Evidence of systemic bias against minority defendants
- Conclusion: Reform possibilities and the path toward equitable justice
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper frames a complex sociolegal question—whether American justice is truly blind—with a clear thesis and structured argument, guiding the reader through political, operational, and racial dimensions in a logical sequence.
- It balances competing perspectives (crime control vs. due process, conservative vs. liberal) fairly before staking a position, which strengthens its credibility as an analytical piece.
- Concrete examples—Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, the PATRIOT Act, wrongful convictions, and the Amanda Gorman racial profiling incident—ground abstract legal concepts in real-world events.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative framework analysis: it places two competing models (crime control and due process) side by side, defines each using cited scholarly sources, and evaluates their relative strengths before drawing a conclusion. This technique is effective for policy-oriented arguments because it shows awareness of counterarguments while still advancing a clear analytical claim.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a definitional problem (what is justice?) to establish its stakes, then moves through two major analytical sections—political/operational perspectives and minority profiling—before closing with a normative conclusion about reform. Each section builds on the previous one, making the argument cumulative rather than episodic. The conclusion appropriately widens the lens to systemic issues like mass incarceration and mandatory sentencing laws.
Introduction
Like pornography, many Americans claim they may not be able to define it, but they know what justice is when they see it. Moreover, Black's Law Dictionary (1990) offers only a circular definition of justice—"to see justice done"—that does nothing to illuminate the concept. Unfortunately, the lack of definitional clarity is not the only constraint on the equitable administration of the law. A wide array of other factors, including most especially race and socioeconomic status, also play a critical role.
Indeed, charges of so-called "white privilege" have been increasingly discussed in the mainstream media, and a growing number of Americans are questioning whether the American ideal of blind justice for all is a reality or a myth. To determine the facts, this paper examines the effects of political and operational perspectives on crime control as they apply to minorities and the economically disadvantaged. It also identifies several corresponding key goals of crime control and analyzes which goal can be achieved better than the others. Finally, the paper discusses whether minorities are unfairly profiled, arrested, and prosecuted—and are therefore inadequately protected by the criminal justice system compared to other demographic groups.
References
About the Fourteenth Amendment. (2021). Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute. Retrieved from
Gorman, A. (2021, March 6). Poet Amanda Gorman says she was racially profiled near her home. New York Post. Retrieved from https://www.wndu.com/2021/03/06/poet-amanda-gorman-says-she-was-racially-profiled-near-her-home/. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/priority
Priority definition in Merriam-Webster. (2021). Retrieved from
Sensoy, O., & DiAngelo, R. (2009, January). Developing social justice literacy. Phi Delta Kappan, 345–350.
Worrall, J. (2015). Crime in America: What works? (3rd ed.).
Already a member? Log in
Unlock the rest of this paper
135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection
7-Day Pass
Does not renew
Get 7-Day PassMonthly
Renews at $12.99/month until canceled
Start MonthlyAnnual
Renews at $99/year until canceled
Start Annual- Unlimited AI writing tools
- Plagiarism and AI text detection tool
Plan details
Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.
TextChecker scans: 3 during the 7-Day Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.
Prices exclude applicable tax.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.