Competing Models of Criminal Justice in the United States
This paper examines the emergence of competing models of criminal justice in the United States, with particular focus on the crime control and due process models that have dominated American policy for much of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. Drawing on scholarship by Packer, Roach, Sanchez, and others, the paper outlines six models identified by the U.S. Department of Justice and traces how public opinion, legislative priorities, and the limitations of harsh sentencing policies — such as "three strikes" laws — have shifted the balance between punishment-oriented and rights-protective approaches. The paper concludes that an effective criminal justice system requires a pragmatic balance between these two competing frameworks.
- Introduction: U.S. incarceration and competing criminal justice models
- Six Models of Criminal Justice: Six DOJ models of criminal justice listed
- The Crime Control Model: Get-tough approach, public opinion, and three strikes
- The Due Process Model: Sixth Amendment rights and presumption of innocence
- Shifting Toward Balance: Reform pressures and the shift away from crime control
- Conclusion: Need for balance between competing justice models
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper clearly frames the central tension between the crime control and due process models using a compelling extreme-case comparison — incarcerating 99 innocents versus freeing 99 criminals — which makes the abstract distinction concrete and memorable.
- It grounds its argument in authoritative sources, including a foundational 1964 study by Herbert Packer and more recent scholarship, lending credibility to its historical narrative.
- The paper maintains a balanced tone, acknowledging the pragmatic value of each model rather than simply advocating for one over the other.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of synthesized literature review to build a policy argument. Rather than summarizing sources in isolation, the author weaves multiple citations into a coherent chronological narrative — showing how scholarly debate, legislative change, and public opinion have interacted over time to shape the U.S. criminal justice system.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a contextual introduction establishing the U.S. incarceration rate as a consequence of the crime control model. It then enumerates all six Department of Justice models before narrowing focus to the crime control and due process models. Subsequent paragraphs trace the historical predominance of the crime control model, its limitations, and the gradual shift toward due process thinking. The conclusion synthesizes findings and argues for a pragmatic balance between the two approaches.
Introduction
Today, the United States incarcerates more of its citizens per capita than any other country on earth, and this outcome is largely the result of the crime control model of criminal justice that has predominated over the past several decades. Things may be changing, however, as the due process model becomes the criminal justice model of choice for a growing number of states. These two models represent the culmination of centuries of debate concerning the optimal approach to criminal justice, and a number of other models have been used throughout history.
To determine how the current outcome emerged, this paper reviews the relevant literature to explain the factors that have historically influenced the type of criminal justice system in place in the United States. Following this review, the paper presents a summary of key findings concerning the emergence of competing models of criminal justice in recent decades.
Six Models of Criminal Justice
According to the U.S. Department of Justice, there are six competing models of criminal justice:
1. The due process model — exacting justice between equal parties;
2. The crime control model — punishing wrong and preventing further crime;
3. The bureaucratic model — controlling crime and criminals;
4. The medical model — rehabilitating offenders;
5. The status passage model — publicly denouncing the crime and criminal; and
6. The power model — maintaining domination by the ruling class and reinforcing class values (King, 1981).
Of these six models, the crime control and due process models have been the two most commonly used in the United States over the past several decades, with the former predominating for the majority of the twentieth century. For a broader overview of how these frameworks developed, see the Wikipedia article on criminal justice.
The Crime Control Model
Given the high stakes and countless types of criminal acts that plague modern society, it is little wonder that formulating an optimal criminal justice model has been a challenging enterprise for American lawmakers. As the research shows, public opinion is among the major factors that have influenced the type of criminal justice system in place at any given point in the nation's history. American society expects the criminal justice system to punish individuals for crimes commensurate with their severity. Proponents of this "get tough on crime" approach therefore subscribe to the crime control model. Taken to its extreme, the crime control model would incarcerate 99 innocent people in order to ensure that one criminal was brought to justice. In other words, the crime control model advocates a punitive approach that is routinely promoted by politicians seeking to appeal to a body politic naturally concerned about crime.
The prevailing political perspective at any point in American history serves to explain, at least in part, why certain criminal justice models are in place — but these perspectives can change due to shifts in public opinion. The effectiveness of the crime control model became the focus of a growing body of scholarship during the latter half of the twentieth century, when especially draconian laws such as "three strikes" statutes were in effect (Robinson, 2020). As Sanchez (2017) points out, "The crime control model is used when promoting policies that allow the system to get tough, expand police powers, change sentencing practices such as creating 'Three Strikes,' and more" (p. 71).
In this regard, Sanchez (2017) further reports that "the crime control model prioritizes the efficient suppression and control of crime for public safety and order, over individual freedom. This model advocates for swift and severe punishment for offenders, resembling an assembly-line justice process" (p. 70). By prioritizing harsh punishments over the protection of Sixth Amendment guarantees, the crime control model also relies on rapid plea-bargaining alternatives in order to free the courts for the next wave of criminal cases generated by this model (Sanchez, 2017).
Conclusion
While the crime control model would "lock 'em up and throw away the key" regardless of any extenuating circumstances, the due process model seeks to afford everyone their constitutional rights no matter how long it requires or how expensive the process. From a strictly pragmatic perspective, it is reasonable to conclude that the American criminal justice system would quickly grind to a halt if the crime control model's plea-bargaining alternative were eliminated. At the same time, it is equally clear that some type of expedient is needed, given the massive number of laws still on the books in many states that criminalize activities such as marijuana possession.
The research was consistent in showing that some type of balance between these two competing models is necessary unless and until a mechanism is implemented that fully guarantees defendants their Sixth Amendment rights while also ensuring that perpetrators are punished appropriately for their crimes.
References
King, M. (1981). Framework of criminal justice. U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/framework-criminal-justice
Klein, S. R. (2006). Enhancing the judicial role in criminal plea and sentence bargaining. Texas Law Review, 84(7), 2023–2053.
Roach, K. (1999). Four models of the criminal process. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 89(2), 671.
Robinson, P. H. (2020). Mitigations: The forgotten side of the proportionality principle. Harvard Journal on Legislation, 57(1), 219–271.
Sanchez, S. (2017). The crime control and due process models. Introduction to the American Criminal Justice System. Retrieved from https://openoregon.pressbooks.pub/ccj230/chapter/1-8-due-process-and-crime-control-model/
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.