By Jo Deakin, Claire Fox, Raquel Matos

The construction and labelling of groups of young people as ‘risky’ sets off a multifaceted and dynamic social process of stigma that frequently results in reduced life chances and limited opportunities for change. Drawing on case study data from 4 European countries, this paper focuses on the ways in which stigma is reproduced through interactions and interventions that label young people. Our analysis explores how young people experience and understand stigma, and how they respond to it. Framed within a theoretical understanding of stigma as a construct of power we examine its components and cyclical process, its role in shaping policies of social control, and its consequences for groups of ‘risky’ young people. Our analysis develops Link and Phelan’s (2001) concept to include reference to young people’s reactions and responses: alienation and marginalisation; anger and resistance; empathy and generativity. In conclusion, we argue that stigma acts primarily as an inhibitor of young people’s constructive engagement in wider society, serving to reduce beneficial opportunities. However, some young people are able to resist the label, and, for them, resistance can become generative and enabling.

European Journal of Criminology. 19, 4, p. 653-673 21 p., 2022

By Clarence Okoh

Public and private actors are turning to artificial intelligence (AI) and other big data technologies to engineer new futures for structural racism and social inequality in the United States, a phenomenon that the sociologist Ruha Benjamin has termed the “New Jim Code.”

These technologies are upending decades of civil and human rights legal standards, expanding mass criminalization, restricting access to social services, and enabling systemic discrimination in housing, employment, and health care, among other areas.3 The New Jim Code carries unique threats to youth and young adults of color, especially in the context of K-12 public schools.

In recent years, federal policymakers have taken steps to address the societal implications of AI and big data technologies, including the White House Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights, President Biden’s Executive Order on Artificial Intelligence, and the U.S. Department of Education’s guidance on AI in schools. However, these efforts have largely failed to address the specific harms that these technologies raise for youth and young adults of color and youth from other historically marginalized communities.

As the infrastructure of police surveillance grows in public schools, communities must be prepared to safeguard the rights and freedoms of students and families. This report is designed to help youth justice advocates, youth leaders, educators, caregivers, and policymakers understand and challenge the impact of school surveillance, data criminalization, and police surveillance technologies in schools.

This report includes:

• An analysis of six key facts about the impacts of data criminalization and school surveillance technologies on education equity.

• A case study of an AI school surveillance technology that can land children in adult misdemeanor court.

• Key recommendations for education policymakers and school district leaders for advancing youth data justice.

Washington, DC:CLASP, 2024. 17p.

By Andrew McGrath, Alison Gerard, and Emma Colvin

The current study examines the factors underlying pathways from out-of-home care into the criminal justice system. Using a multi-method approach—specifically, court observations, file reviews, and qualitative interviews—we found evidence of how histories of trauma and situational factors relating to the care environment interact to increase criminalization. While many policy initiatives have been developed to address this criminalization, in all parts of our study we found little evidence these are having an impact on practice in relation to care-experienced children. Some innovations we observed in our United Kingdom case study offer potential solutions to address this serious and ongoing problem.

Trends & issues in crime and criminal justice no. 600. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. 2020. 14p.