White fear: by every means

The history of slavery in the United States is marked by the complex relationship between the enslaved, their owners, and the legal framework that sought to maintain the institution of slavery. Among the various forms of resistance employed by enslaved people, running away was one of the most direct and impactful. The act of escaping not only challenged the institution of slavery but also posed a significant financial threat to slaveholders. This fear of losing valuable "property" led to the enactment of increasingly stringent laws like the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. This federal mandate played a significant role in the development of policing in America by institutionalizing the enforcement of slavery through legal and extralegal means. It required local authorities and ordinary citizens to become enforcers of slavery. The need to track, capture, and return runaway slaves led to the formation of organized groups, such as slave patrols in the South, which are considered precursors to modern police forces. These patrols were tasked with maintaining the social order by surveilling, capturing, and controlling the movement of Black people, both free and enslaved. This enforcement model laid the groundwork for the racialized policing practices that have persisted in various forms throughout American history. Today, black males are five times more likely to be incarcerated than their white counterparts, and young black males are 22 times more likely to be killed by police.

This post is part two of a four-part series examining white fear and its role in establishing a system of institutionalized racism through violence. As there should be with any discussion on something as complex as systemic racism, there is an inherent overlap in these blog posts. The story of racism in America is not linear, nor is systemic and institutional racism one-layered systems of oppression. Rather, there is a deeply-entrenched and multifaceted structure, shaped by a complex history of nuance and violence with each layer of the system interacting with others, creating a pervasive network of discrimination and inequality that continues to impact society in profound ways.

Policing has been part of this country for a long time, even before the United States of America was officially established as an independent nation. In the mid-1600s, there was the Boston Watch, which was formed by the Puritans to maintain public order in the growing Massachusetts Bay Colony. The Watchmen were responsible for patrolling the streets at night, preventing crime, and enforcing curfews. The Boston Watch involved the enforcement of laws against enslaved and free Black people. In 1641, Massachusetts became the first colony to legalize slavery through the "Body of Liberties." The Boston Watch was responsible for enforcing curfews and restrictions specifically targeting Black individuals. For instance, Black people, both enslaved and free, were often required to carry passes or documents proving their legal status and were subjected to increased scrutiny by Watchmen. Violations often led to harsh punishments, further entrenching racial inequality within the colony's legal and social structures.

There were also informal militias at the time that formed to help enforce order in counties and cities throughout the colonies. One prominent example of a militia that enforced slavery and racial hierarchy in 1600s America is the Virginia Militia. Established in 1607, the Virginia Militia was initially formed to defend the Jamestown colony from Native American attacks. However, as the colony grew and the institution of slavery took root, the militia's role expanded to include the enforcement of slave laws. The militia was instrumental in enforcing the "Act XII" of 1662, which codified that the status of a child, whether free or enslaved, would follow the condition of the mother. This law entrenched racial slavery and was vigorously enforced by militias. Additionally, militias were often mobilized to capture runaway slaves, such as during Bacon’s Rebellion in 1676, where they suppressed both Black and Indigenous resistance, solidifying racial hierarchies.

Similarly, the South Carolina Militia, formed in the late 1600s, was crucial in enforcing the 1696 Slave Code. This code established strict controls over enslaved people, and the militia actively patrolled to prevent slave uprisings and escape attempts, using violence and intimidation to maintain the plantation economy and white supremacy.

The early policing in 1600s America set the stage for the development of a formal system of slave patrols. These patrols emerged as a response to the economic imperative of maintaining slavery. Slaveholders, including prominent figures like George Washington, relied on the forced labor of enslaved people for economic gain. The loss of an enslaved person through escape represented not just a loss of labor but also a financial setback, as enslaved people were valuable commodities.

George Washington himself, during the Revolutionary War in 1781, experienced this firsthand when several of his enslaved people escaped, taking advantage of the chaos of the war. In response, Washington sought assistance from local authorities, including writing a letter to a New York police officer, asking for help in recapturing them. He wrote, “I must beg the favor of you to keep a lookout for them, and by every means in your power, endeavor to apprehend and secure them, so that I may obtain them again."

The establishment of slave patrols formalized the efforts of slave owners like Washington. Composed primarily of white men, often from lower social and economic classes, these patrols were legally empowered to enforce the slave codes. They operated at the county or community level, with membership often compulsory for white men. Wealthier slaveholders also participated, recognizing the patrols' role in protecting their economic interests.

These patrols had extensive authority, including the power to enter plantations, conduct searches, and use violence to maintain control over the enslaved population. They were designed to empower the entire white community, not just with police power but with the duty to monitor the movements of Black people. Enslaved people were often required to carry passes when moving beyond their designated areas, and the patrols ensured strict enforcement of these regulations.

The pervasive nature of these patrols is evident in how they were organized and operated. Members were paid modestly, around 25 cents an hour, but were fined if they shirked their duty, with fines ranging from $5 to $10. This system ensured that all white men were invested in the maintenance of slavery, making the enforcement of racial control a community-wide effort. These slave patrols were a precursor to modern policing in the United States, embedding a legacy of racial control and enforcement that would persist for centuries.

The Articles of Confederation, the first constitution of the United States, had left the issue of fugitive slaves inadequately addressed, leading to inconsistent practices across states and increasing tensions between the North and South. Southern slaveholders grew frustrated with the difficulty of recapturing escaped slaves who fled to Northern states, where local laws and public sentiment often provided protection. Unorganized slave patrols were insufficient, especially when fugitives crossed state lines. Over time, Northern states increasingly refused to cooperate in the return of fugitive slaves, exacerbating legal disputes and straining relations between states.

During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, the issue was directly addressed. Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3, known as the Fugitive Slave Clause, was introduced as a compromise between Northern and Southern states. This clause mandated that any person "held to service or labor" in one state who escaped to another must be returned to their owner upon claim, laying the groundwork for federal intervention but without specifying procedures or penalties.

As President, George Washington was keenly aware of the challenges posed by fugitive slaves, both as a public figure and a private slaveholder. His experiences with runaway slaves reinforced his belief in the need for a strong legal framework to ensure their recovery. Southern states, facing increasing resistance from the North, pressured Washington to support a federal law that would enforce the Fugitive Slave Clause.

Washington, seeking to balance national unity with Southern demands, oversaw the development of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793. The Act provided legal procedures for the capture and return of runaway slaves, granting slaveholders or their agents the authority to seize escaped slaves in free states and present them before local magistrates. It also imposed penalties on those who obstructed the recovery process.

Despite opposition from some Northern representatives, concerned about states' rights and individual freedoms, the Act passed through Congress, and Washington signed it into law on February 12, 1793. However, the Act's effectiveness was limited, as many Northern states enacted personal liberty laws to protect free Black people and escaped slaves from being forcibly returned to slavery. These laws provided legal protections, such as the right to a jury trial, and penalized false claims of slave status. This Northern resistance only intensified Southern fears, as slaveholders saw the growing abolitionist movement as a direct threat to their economic interests.

The issue of runaway slaves became increasingly politicized in the years leading up to the Civil War. As the abolitionist movement gained momentum in the North, Southern states and their representatives in Congress sought to strengthen the legal protections for slavery. The economic implications of losing enslaved labor through escape were a significant motivating factor behind this political push.

One of the earliest political responses to the growing tensions over slavery was the Missouri Compromise of 1820. This compromise was intended to maintain the balance of power between slave and free states by admitting Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state. While the Missouri Compromise temporarily quelled the sectional tensions, it did little to address the underlying issues related to the enforcement of fugitive slave laws.

Slave patrols were increasingly written into law, like the slave patrol statute from Louisiana in 1835, which declared that slave patrols are to arrest any slave or slaves whether with or without a permit who may be caught in the woods or forest with any fire or torch which slave or slaves thus arrested shall be subjected to corporal punishment not exceeding 30 lashings. In this early legislation, part of the concern is an uprising, or the fear that slaves will burn things down and the responsibility not of what we would later expect due process or what white property owners were entitled to in the Bill of Rights but, immediate corporal punishment. So, early in our country, we can see the surveillance, the deputization essentially of all white men to be police officers—or in this case, slave patrollers—and then to dispense corporal punishment on the scene are all baked in from the very beginning. These punishments were swift, indiscriminate and harsh.

Solomon Northup, whose story was told in the film "12 Years A Slave," lived as a free person in New York state before being abducted and sold into slavery in the South, wrote, “patrollers whose business it is to seize and whip any slave they may find wandering from the plantation ride on horseback headed by a captain armed and accompanied by dogs. They have the right, either by law or by general consent, to inflict discretionary chastisements upon a black man caught beyond the boundaries of his master's estate without a pass, even to shoot him if he attempts to escape.”

As the United States expanded westward, the question of whether new territories would permit slavery became increasingly contentious. The Compromise of 1850, which included the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, was another attempt to address these tensions. This new Fugitive Slave Act was far more stringent than the 1793 version, reflecting the growing fears among Southern slaveholders that their economic interests were under threat.

The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 required that all escaped slaves, upon capture, be returned to their masters and that officials and citizens of free states had to cooperate in this law. The Act denied accused fugitive slaves the right to a jury trial and increased the penalties for those who aided in their escape.

It became a central issue in the debates leading up to the Civil War, with both Northern and Southern politicians using the law to rally their respective constituencies. In the North, the law was seen as a symbol of the federal government's complicity in the institution of slavery and a violation of states' rights. This view was reflected in the rise of the Republican Party, which opposed the expansion of slavery and sought to limit the power of slave-holding states. In the South, the Fugitive Slave Act was viewed as essential to protecting their economic interests and way of life. The law's passage and enforcement became a rallying cry for Southern politicians who argued that the North's resistance to the Act was a direct threat to the Union.

The tensions over the Fugitive Slave Act and the broader issue of slavery came to a head in the election of 1860. Abraham Lincoln's victory, on a platform that opposed the expansion of slavery, was seen by many in the South as a direct threat to their way of life. In response to Lincoln's election, several Southern states seceded from the Union, leading to the outbreak of the Civil War.

The patrols persisted in Southern states until the Confederacy's surrender in 1865, but the end of the Civil War did not bring an end to the violent surveillance of newly freed Black citizens. Although the Fugitive Slave Act effectively ended with the conclusion of the American Civil War and the abolition of slavery through the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, Southern states began enacting laws known as Black Codes almost immediately atthe conclusion of the war. These laws allowed white people to continue exerting control over many aspects of Black lives, exploiting a loophole in the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery "except as a punishment for crime."

The 13th Amendment's exception clause became a tool for Southern states to perpetuate slavery by criminalizing Black Americans. The Black Codes were designed to re-enslave African Americans by criminalizing nearly every aspect of their freedom and mobility—except for the right to work for a white man on his terms. This systemic criminalization served to maintain racial control and economic exploitation, echoing the very foundations of slavery in America.

By providing a legal loophole, the amendment enabled states to exploit incarcerated individuals for labor, perpetuating a system of racial and economic oppression. This provision contributed to the rise of convict leasing and other forms of forced labor that disproportionately affected Black individuals, reinforcing the racial hierarchies established during slavery and laying the groundwork for modern practices of penal labor and systemic inequality in the criminal justice system. Leading up to this, the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 had already entrenched racial biases in law enforcement practices and the Civil War, though a pivotal moment in challenging slavery, also entrenched systemic racism as Southern states that developed policing systems designed to control and suppress newly freed Black populations.

These historical elements converged to embed racism into American policing, fostering a legacy of racial control and discrimination that persists today. The combination of legal frameworks and social practices established a precedent for racial inequities in law enforcement, influencing contemporary issues of racial profiling and disparities in the criminal justice system.

After the end of the Civil War, various racist policies and practices exploited loopholes in the Thirteenth Amendment and were put in place to maintain white supremacy and control over formerly enslaved African Americans.

Vagrancy laws were used extensively to criminalize African Americans who were unemployed or unable to prove they had a job. These laws were designed to force black people into labor contracts with white employers, often under harsh and exploitative conditions. The laws were deliberately vague, allowing law enforcement to arrest and detain African Americans for minor or fabricated offenses. For example, in Mississippi, the vagrancy law of 1865 stated that anyone who was found "without lawful employment" could be arrested. Those arrested could be forced into labor, with fines and imprisonment serving as deterrents.

Black Codes were laws passed in Southern states in 1865 and 1866 aimed at restricting the freedoms of African Americans and ensuring their availability as a cheap labor force. The Black Codes included restrictions on African Americans' right to own property, conduct business, or move freely. They were required to enter into labor contracts with white employers or face punishment.

For example, the Louisiana Black Code of 1866, Act of March 17, 1866 stated "Every negro who shall be found on the second Monday in January, eighteen hundred and sixty-six, or thereafter, with no lawful employment or business... shall be deemed a vagrant and be punished as provided for vagrants; and all those convicted of vagrancy may be hired out by the officer having them in charge, for the time specified in his judgment or sentence."

It went on to say that “it shall be the duty of all sheriffs, justices of the peace, and other civil officers of the several parishes... to report to the judge of the parish court all minors under eighteen years of age, whose parents have not the means or who refuse to support said minors."

"Upon failure to pay any fine or give security for the same, the said vagrant may be hired out by the sheriff or other officer in like manner as is provided in case of other criminal offenders."

Many Black men and women were forced into labor through convict leasing systems, effectively re-enslaving them under the guise of criminal justice. This system allowed state governments to lease out prisoners to private businesses, such as plantations, railroads, and mining companies, where they would perform grueling and often dangerous work for little to no pay.

The conditions under convict leasing were notoriously brutal, with leased convicts subjected to harsh treatment, poor living conditions, and severe physical abuse. Unlike the system of slavery, where owners had a financial incentive to maintain the health of their slaves, companies leasing convicts had little regard for their well-being, leading to high mortality rates. This system not only perpetuated the economic exploitation of Black labor but also reinforced the racial hierarchy that had been central to slavery. Convict leasing became a critical tool in the South’s efforts to rebuild its economy after the Civil War, maintaining white supremacy by continuing to control and exploit Black bodies through the criminal justice system. It was a grim reminder that the abolition of slavery did not end the subjugation of Black Americans, but rather transformed it into new and insidious forms.

These Vagrancy Laws and Black Codes were essentially slavery by another name, except this time through a legalized criminal justice system.

At the time, the penitentiary system had already been developing in the North since the 1800s, influenced by Enlightenment ideas about rehabilitation and the moral improvement of criminals. Northern states established structured prisons that emphasized solitary confinement, labor, and reform, such as the Eastern State Penitentiary in Pennsylvania, which became a model for prison systems across the country. These institutions reflected a growing belief that the state should manage crime and punishment in an organized, controlled environment.

In contrast, the South lagged in developing a structured prison system before and after the Civil War. The Southern economy was deeply entrenched in slavery, and as a result, there was less emphasis on building penitentiaries since enslaved people were often punished by their owners rather than through a formal legal process. After the Civil War, with the abolition of slavery and the collapse of the Confederacy, the South faced a significant challenge in managing crime and maintaining social order without the institutional framework that had developed in the North. The absence of a comprehensive prison system in the South left a vacuum in law enforcement and punishment, which vigilante groups like the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) quickly exploited.

In the post-Civil War South, the KKK and similar groups rose to power, using terror and violence to assert control over the newly freed Black population and suppress any attempts at social and political equality. Without a robust state-run system to enforce laws and administer justice, these vigilante groups operated with impunity, effectively taking the place of an official prison system in many areas. The Klan's activities were often tolerated or even supported by local authorities, who either lacked the resources to combat them or shared their racist ideologies. This period of lawlessness and extrajudicial punishment contributed to the entrenchment of white supremacy in the South, as vigilante justice became a primary tool for maintaining racial hierarchies and suppressing Black civil rights.

The rise of the KKK and other violent groups in the South created an environment of fear and insecurity for Black Americans. The violence was not limited to Klan members; it was also carried out by local law enforcement and other white citizens who were determined to uphold the racial hierarchy. The threat of lynching was ever-present, with tens of thousands of Black men, women, and children being lynched between the 1880s and the early 20th century.

This pervasive and unchecked violence was a significant factor that led to the Great Migration, a mass movement of Black Americans from the rural South to urban areas in the North and Midwest, beginning around 1916 and continuing through the 1970s. Seeking to escape the terror of lynchings, racial violence, and the oppressive Jim Crow laws, millions of Black Americans left their homes in search of better opportunities and safety. The promise of jobs in Northern factories during World War I also attracted many Black Southerners, who saw migration as a chance to build new lives free from the daily threat of racial violence.

The Great Migration had profound effects on both the South and the North. In the South, the migration led to a significant decrease in the Black population, which had been crucial to the region’s agricultural economy. In the North, the influx of Black Americans transformed cities like Chicago, Detroit, and New York, leading to the growth of vibrant Black communities and the Harlem Renaissance.

This mass movement led to an increase in white anxiety about Black Americans as the migrants entered cities that were previously dominated by white populations. The sudden and significant influx of Black residents into these urban centers heightened racial tensions and fueled fears among white communities about changes in the economic, social, and cultural dynamics of their cities.

One of the primary sources of white anxiety was the competition for jobs. Many Black migrants moved northward in search of better employment opportunities, particularly in industrial jobs that were becoming available during World War I and World War II. As Black workers entered the labor market, they were often willing to accept lower wages than their white counterparts, leading to fears among white workers that their jobs and economic stability were at risk. This competition intensified racial hostilities, with many white workers and labor unions pushing for discriminatory practices to exclude Black workers from certain industries and trades.

The demographic shift also led to increased anxiety over housing. As Black families moved into urban neighborhoods, they faced widespread discrimination in the housing market, often being confined to overcrowded and poorly maintained areas. However, when Black families began moving into previously all-white neighborhoods, it sparked intense backlash. White residents feared that property values would decline and that their neighborhoods would deteriorate. This fear of "racial integration" led to practices such as redlining and the establishment of restrictive covenants, which legally barred Black Americans from purchasing homes in certain areas. In some cases, white residents resorted to violence, engaging in acts of intimidation, vandalism, and even bombings to prevent Black families from settling in their communities.

Another aspect of white anxiety was cultural. The migration brought Black cultural expressions, such as jazz music, literature, and art, to the forefront of American culture, particularly during the Harlem Renaissance. While some white Americans embraced and celebrated these cultural contributions, others felt threatened by what they perceived as a challenge to the dominance of white culture. The visibility and success of Black cultural figures heightened fears of a changing social order, leading to further resentment and attempts to suppress Black cultural expression.

Moreover, the increasing political activism among Black Americans in the North added to white anxiety. As Black communities grew in numbers, they began to organize and demand civil rights more assertively, challenging segregation and discrimination not only in the South but also in the North. The rise of the Civil Rights Movement in the mid-20th century, with its roots in the urban North, was seen by many white Americans as a direct threat to the status quo. This led to increased resistance to integration and equality, fueling further racial tensions.

All of this would lead to a series of violence committed against Black communities covered in part four of this four-part series.

As for the history of policing as we moved into the 20th century, Southern police forces were notorious for their brutal treatment of Black communities, particularly during the Civil Rights Movement. Law enforcement agencies actively resisted desegregation efforts and used violence to suppress protests, often with impunity. Events like the violent response to the 1965 Selma to Montgomery marches, where police attacked peaceful protesters with clubs and tear gas, became emblematic of the deeply ingrained racism within Southern police departments. This racism was not just a product of individual prejudices but was systematically embedded in the policies and practices of law enforcement agencies.

In the North, racism still permeated police departments. As Northern cities experienced massive waves of Black migration during the Great Migration, Northern police departments increasingly became tools of enforcing racial boundaries, often participating in or turning a blind eye to practices such as redlining, which confined Black residents to overcrowded and underfunded neighborhoods. The police frequently targeted these communities with discriminatory practices, such as racial profiling, stop-and-frisk policies, and excessive use of force. This led to a growing mistrust between Black communities and law enforcement, which was further exacerbated by the police's role in suppressing the urban uprisings of the 1960s, such as those in Detroit and Newark. These uprisings were often sparked by incidents of police brutality and were met with aggressive crackdowns that resulted in widespread violence and further entrenched racial tensions.

By the mid-20th century, police departments across the United States had become deeply implicated in the maintenance of racial inequality. The militarization of police forces during the Civil Rights era, coupled with policies like "broken windows" policing and the War on Drugs in the latter half of the century, disproportionately targeted Black communities, leading to mass incarceration and the further entrenchment of systemic racism in law enforcement.

The institutionalization of racism in policing was not confined to overt acts of violence or discrimination but was also reflected in the broader structures and policies that governed law enforcement. Police departments were often staffed and led by individuals who shared the racial prejudices of the wider society, and there was little accountability for officers who engaged in racist practices. This lack of oversight and the culture of impunity within many police forces allowed discriminatory practices to flourish.

Moreover, the rise of police unions in the late 20th century further insulated officers from accountability, making it difficult to address issues of racism and misconduct within the ranks. These unions often resisted reforms and protected officers accused of wrongdoing, contributing to a culture where racial bias in policing was allowed to persist.

In the 21st century, the legacy of racially biased policing continued to manifest in troubling new ways. Movements like Black Lives Matter emerged in response to high-profile cases of police violence against Black individuals, including the killings of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and George Floyd. These movements drew global attention to the systemic racism deeply embedded within law enforcement, highlighting the disproportionate use of force against Black communities, the over-policing of minority neighborhoods, and the lack of accountability for officers involved in fatal encounters. Despite the peaceful nature of many Black Lives Matter protests, they have often been met with aggressive policing tactics, further exacerbating tensions between law enforcement and communities of color.

In reaction to the growing influence of Black Lives Matter, the Blue Lives Matter movement emerged, positioning itself as a counter-movement focused on supporting police officers. However, it has often been criticized for resisting calls for racial justice and police reform. Critics argue that by equating criticism of police practices with attacks on individual officers, Blue Lives Matter diverts attention from the systemic issues at the heart of the policing debate. Furthermore, the movement's support for legislation that enhances penalties for crimes against police officers is seen by many as a way to prioritize the lives of law enforcement over those of the communities they are sworn to protect. This dynamic perpetuates a divisive "us versus them" mentality, hindering meaningful dialogue and progress toward addressing the deep-seated racism in American policing.

Historically, when Black communities have mobilized to challenge systemic racism and demand equal rights, counter-movements have often emerged to resist these efforts, often under the guise of protecting law and order. During the Civil Rights Movement, for example, organizations like the White Citizens' Councils positioned themselves as defenders of law and order against the demands of Black activists, using rhetoric that emphasized the need to protect communities from the perceived chaos and violence that civil rights would bring. Similarly, Blue Lives Matter has been criticized for diverting attention from the legitimate grievances raised by Black Lives Matter, particularly around police brutality and systemic racism. By framing the issue as one of protecting law enforcement rather than addressing the root causes of police violence against Black communities, Blue Lives Matter mirrors past efforts to resist racial progress and maintain the racial status quo.

The reality is that American policing has a deeply entrenched history of racism, originating from slave patrols and evolving through the enforcement of Black Codes, Jim Crow laws, and other discriminatory practices designed to oppress and control Black communities. Despite this, Black communities do not have a history of violence against police, contrary to the pervasive public opinion shaped by white narratives that deliberately paint Black activism as dangerous or criminal. This intentional misrepresentation has been used by white people and law enforcement as a tool to maintain control over Black populations, subverting efforts for equality and reinforcing the power dynamics that uphold systemic racism.

The reality of crime in the United States, when viewed through the lens of objective data, reveals a stark contrast to the pervasive stereotypes that have long depicted Black men as inherently criminal. Research consistently shows that crime rates among Black individuals are not significantly higher than those among white individuals when accounting for socioeconomic factors. However, the stereotype of Black men as criminals has led to disproportionate scrutiny and harsher treatment within the criminal justice system, fueling a cycle of mass incarceration that continues to devastate Black communities.

Statistically, crime rates are influenced by a range of factors, including poverty, education, and access to resources—factors that affect individuals of all races. Studies have shown that when these variables are controlled, the racial disparity in crime rates diminishes significantly. However, the stereotype of Black men as criminals has been deeply ingrained in the American consciousness, reinforced by media portrayals, political rhetoric, and biased policing practices. This stereotype has led to Black men being disproportionately targeted by law enforcement. They are more likely to be stopped, searched, arrested, and charged with crimes than their white counterparts, even when they commit the same offenses. This unequal treatment begins with policing and continues through the courts, where Black defendants often face harsher sentences and are more likely to be incarcerated than white defendants.

The consequences of this biased perception have been catastrophic, leading to mass incarceration that disproportionately affects Black Americans. The War on Drugs, for example, targeted Black communities with aggressive policing and harsh sentencing laws, despite similar rates of drug use across racial groups. This has led to a situation where Black Americans make up a vastly disproportionate share of the prison population, despite not committing crimes at significantly higher rates than white Americans.

Mass incarceration has far-reaching effects beyond the individuals who are imprisoned. It disrupts families, weakens communities, and perpetuates cycles of poverty and criminality. When large numbers of Black men are removed from their communities, it leaves behind broken families and diminished social and economic networks, making it even harder for those communities to thrive. Moreover, a criminal record can make it difficult for formerly incarcerated individuals to find employment, secure housing, and reintegrate into society, further entrenching them in poverty and increasing the likelihood of recidivism.

The image of Black men as criminals has thus created a self-perpetuating cycle: racial stereotypes lead to disproportionate policing and incarceration, which in turn reinforces the stereotype of Black criminality. Breaking this cycle requires not only addressing the biases within the criminal justice system but also challenging the stereotypes that underpin them. This includes changing the way Black people are portrayed in the media, reforming policies that disproportionately impact Black communities, and addressing the systemic inequalities that contribute to crime in the first place.

The disparities in policing are stark. According to the Stanford Open Policing Project, Black drivers are about 20% more likely to be stopped by police during a traffic stop compared to White drivers. This disparity persists across various types of traffic stops, including stops for moving violations and equipment issues. During the peak of the stop-and-frisk era in New York City (2004-2012), Black and Latino individuals were disproportionately targeted. For example, in 2011, 83% of individuals stopped by police were Black or Latino.

Once encountered by police, Black individuals are more likely to be victims of police brutality. According to data from the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Black people are about 3.5 times more likely to be killed by police than White people. Despite making up only 13% of the population, roughly 28% of police violence is committed against Black individuals. This number rises to 35% of police violence when the suspects are unarmed. In fact, Black individuals are about 5 times more likely to be killed by police while unarmed compared to White individuals.

Once they are encountered by police and survive, Black Americans are 2.5 times more likely to be arrested than White individuals, despite similar rates of crime across racial groups, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

And once in the judicial system, Black individuals face higher conviction rates and harsher sentences. A study by The Sentencing Project found that, for drug offenses, Black individuals are 13% more likely to be convicted than White individuals for similar drug-related crimes. This disparity is particularly pronounced in federal drug cases, where Black individuals receive longer sentences compared to their White counterparts. Research published in The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology indicated that Black individuals convicted of drug offenses receive sentences that are, on average, 49% longer than those received by White individuals convicted of similar offenses.

These disparities are especially pronounced in states with a history of slavery. Data from The Sentencing Project shows that Southern states like Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama have some of the highest incarceration rates in the U.S., with Black individuals being significantly over-represented. For example, Louisiana has one of the highest incarceration rates in the nation, with Black individuals comprising about 72% of the prison population despite being 33% of the state’s overall population.

In Louisiana, the Angola Prison is a maximum-security facility where the legacy of slavery is starkly evident. The prison, which is the largest maximum-security prison in the United States, is situated on 18,000 acres of land that was once seven antebellum plantations, including one named Angola after the Portuguese colony from which many of its enslaved people were taken. It opened in 1901 after the land was used for decades under the convict leasing system following Emancipation. Inmates were housed in the old slave quarters and worked on the plantation, often without shade, adequate breaks, or sunscreen. To this day, inmates at Angola are required to work in grueling conditions for minimal pay, often engaging in manual labor on the prison farm and other tasks. This system of labor, coupled with the harsh conditions and a history of racial discrimination, perpetuates a cycle of exploitation reminiscent of antebellum slavery. The prison’s practices reflect broader issues of modern-day incarceration, where the exploitation of inmate labor in Southern states mirrors the racial and economic injustices of the past, reinforcing the troubling connections between the history of slavery and contemporary penal systems.

The story of Angola Prison serves as a potent reminder of how deeply the roots of racism run in America’s criminal justice system. It is not just a relic of the past but a living testament to how historical injustices continue to shape present realities. This underscores the urgent need for systemic change. As long as these disparities persist, the fight for racial justice remains unfinished. The call for reform is not merely about improving policing practices but about dismantling the entire apparatus of racial oppression that has been perpetuated for centuries. It is a call to recognize and rectify the injustices that continue to define the lives of millions of Black Americans. The future of American justice depends on whether we are willing to confront these truths and take bold, transformative action to create a system that is truly fair and equitable for all.