Filtering by
- Creators: School of Social Transformation
- Resource Type: Text
In the last decade, California’s imprisoned population of women has increased by nearly 400% (Chesney-Lind, 2012). The focus of this thesis is to discuss the treatment—or lack thereof—of women within California’s criminal justice system and sentencing laws. By exploring its historical approach to two criminal actions related to women, the Three Strikes law (including non-violent drug crimes) and the absence of laws accounting for experiences of female victims of domestic violence who killed their abusers, I explore how California’s criminal code has marginalized women, and present a summary of the adverse effects brought about by the gender invisibility that is endemic within sentencing policies and practice. I also discuss recent attempted and successful reforms related to these issues, which evidence a shift toward social dialogue on sentencing aiming to address gender inequity in the sentencing code. These reforms were the result of activism; organizations, academics and individuals successfully raised awareness regarding excessive and undue sentencing of women and compelled action by the legislature.
By method of a feminist analysis of these histories, I explore these two pertinent issues in California; both are related to women who, under harsh sentencing laws, were incarcerated under the state’s male-focused legislation. Responses to the inequalities found in these laws included attempts toward both visibility for women and reform related to sentencing. I analyze the ontology of sentencing reform as it relates to activism in order to discuss the implications of further criminal code legislation, as well as the implications of the 2012 reforms in practice. Through the paper, I focus upon how women have become a target of arrest and long sentences not because they are strategically arrested to equalize their representation behind bars, but because the “tough on crime” framework in the criminal code cast a wide and fixed net that incarcerated increasingly more women following the codification of both mandatory minimums and a male-oriented approach to sentencing (Chesney-Lind et. al, 2012).
For this thesis, I analyzed the discourse and content of Proposition 22, a California law which defined all workers utilizing gig-based apps to sell services as independent contractors meaning they were not legally entitled to certain protections such as minimum wage. The law was overturned in court in 2020, however, the advertisements in favor of and discourse behind the law has had a continued impact on all workers. Because of this it is important to examine and conceptualize the ideologies behind the law in order to understand how it was able to pass in a state which tends to vote in favor of increasing employee rights and regulation of industries. To do so, I utilized two methods of analysis, a discourse analysis of legal documents and a content analysis of advertisements. The former revolves around analyzing the discourse and ideologies around two versions of the legislation which were shown to the public, while the latter analysis categorizes and examines the implications of various advertisements utilized by companies to support the proposition. Ultimately, gig companies created an effective campaign that was able to repackage neoliberal deregulation for the general public while actively misrepresenting information around the law leading to long lasting effects that continue to harm workers while lining the pockets of investors despite its overturning.
Passed in April of 2010, Arizona Senate Bill 1070 is nationally recognized as the first state-level anti-immigration legislation of its kind that deputized local police officers to enforce immigration laws. Though response strategies varied widely across activists and organizations, many community organizations devised strategies specifically aimed to protect and assist the undocumented community during the reign of terror that accompanied SB 1070. In looking at the reflections of activists and organization leaders on their own actions and decision-making rationale, I analyze how their strategies and tactics worked to both counter and reconceptualize hegemonic notions of citizenship, belonging, and community through the creation of networks and knowledge funds. By specifically examining the efforts made by No Mas Muerte, Puente Human Rights Movement, and the Calle Dieciseis Mural Project, I show that efforts that go beyond voter mobilization and legal action, which not only work to combat dominant rhetoric but also center the voices of the targeted population through disrupting public space, are essential to responding to political efforts designed to target vulnerable communities. Given their necessity, academics and institutional actors must acknowledge the importance of grassroots efforts in contributing to inter-institutional strategies and ensure that a ground-up analysis of community-based organizations informs their actions taken against state-level anti-immigration laws.