Policy reforms of justice reinvestment: differences between a sample of US states' implementations

During the last two decades the United States federal government has promoted the Justice Reinvestment Initiative (JRI), a technical assistance program to help states implement reinvestment programs. However, much of the literature does not detail what kinds of reforms have been passed in these programs. This study seeks to answer the question: do JRI states have differing legislative focuses? One state from each U.S. Census region was selected based on their year of Justice Reinvestment Initiative program implementation during the study period (January 2004 to December 2020). Results of thematic analyses indicate that great variation exists in the 35 legislative bills that implemented justice reinvestment principles between the four states. Many have prioritized sentencing reforms and supervision enhancements to achieve implementation goals. Additionally, each of the reinvestment programs were revised at least once, with initial reinvestment strategies focusing on tough-on-crime priorities and their revisions moving substantially toward rehabilitation. Finally, no state legally earmarked reinvestment funds for the original purpose of justice reinvestment, community development. Policymakers and researchers alike should use an abundance of caution when comparing states' justice reinvestment successes or failures, as states have unique programs policies may contain critical differences that may affect their success.