Debate Over Proposal to Introduce Race into Criminal Case Outcomes Receives Mixed Reactions

A bill proposing that judges consider a defendant’s race in order to address racial bias and potentially exempt them from certain sentencing terms has sparked controversy among lawmakers. Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer, D-Los Angeles, argues that Assembly Bill 852 is a necessary measure to correct past injustices and ensure equal treatment. On the other hand, Assemblyman Bill Essayli, R-Norco, argues that the bill threatens the principle of blind justice and violates equal due process. The bill, introduced by Jones-Sawyer and based on recommendations from the California Task Force, aims to address perceived inequities in the criminal justice system that have disadvantaged Black defendants.

Assembly Bill 852 calls for judges to consider the disparate impact on historically disenfranchised and system-impacted populations when imposing sentences. According to Assemblyman Corey Jackson, D-Perris, the bill simply requires courts to be thoughtful and take into account the historic and present marginalization of certain populations. However, Essayli believes that considering race in government actions is fundamentally wrong and goes against the principle of blind justice.

Assembly Bill 852 shares similarities with AB 256, the California Racial Justice Act, which allows defendants to challenge a conviction if racial inequities were potentially implicit in the trial process. The bill has received support from the California Public Defenders Association, who argue that sentencing outcomes are influenced by factors such as wealth and skin color, despite the presumption of equal treatment under the law.

While the bill has been approved by the Assembly, it remains a subject of debate. The California District Attorneys’ Association has not taken a position on the matter, and Riverside County District Attorney Mike Hestrin declined to comment. The bill will now be reviewed by the state Senate Committee on Public Safety.