An article for The Crime Report examines restorative justice in prosecutors’ offices and cites a Fordham Law Review paper co-authored by Professor Bruce Green.
Why hasn’t restorative justice caught on in prosecutor’s offices around the country?
While a small but influential group of big-city “progressive” prosecutors are actively using the concept, which offers rehabilitation and “healing” to offenders as an alternative to punishment, mainstream DAs remain skeptical or, in some cases, hostile.
Many are dissuaded by the additional resources required for the programs and others feel constrained by local sentiment that emphasizes “tough on crime” approaches; but these objections could be overcome by demonstrating how restorative justice can “align” with traditional justice goals—including better serving the needs of crime victims, argues a Fordham Law Review paper.
…
Prosecutor buy-in is critical to broader acceptance of restorative justice strategies since only a DA can assent to alternatives to criminal prosecution.
But even those who might be willing to consider it face logistical and structural challenges, said the paper.
“The prosecutor must team up with a social service agency capable of administering a restorative justice program and hire attorneys or other staff within the office to coordinate and help administer it, a process that involves everything from selection criteria to case monitoring to data collection to assessing outcomes,” the authors wrote.
