1) What is your understanding of the racial disparities in Maryland’s criminal justice system? To the extent your office could make a difference, how would you address these disparities?
Maryland has one of the highest rates of imprisoned Black people in the country. Black Marylanders are only around 30% of the state’s population but make up over 70% of our prison population. I will drastically increase police training and build on top of the recent police reforms enacted by the General Assembly (including ending qualified immunity), legalize recreational cannabis (which even under decriminalization is still being used disproportionately against Black residents) and expunge cannabis-related convictions, and increase investments in a multi-pronged strategy to break cycles of incarceration including mental health services, addiction treatment, violence prevention programs like Safe Streets, community medication, and reentry programs (including prison education and job training programs). I also oppose federal or state funding for SROs in our schools, which play a key role in funneling Black youth into the school-to-prison pipeline at a young age, while not increasing school safety. My administration will require racial impact statements for all new bills or major executive actions.
2) Would you support a statewide survey of all Md. State’s Attorneys’ offices to identify any racial / ethnic fairness disparities in charging and plea-bargain policies?
Yes. Maryland has scattershot data collection that varies across counties which makes it difficult to measure disparities and we need to improve it. It is impossible to fix a problem you cannot see.
3) In your opinion, is there a difference between being “tough on crime” and “smart on crime”? Please give examples of what you might do in office in this regard.
“Tough on crime” involves excessively harsh sentences, treating addiction as a rationale for incarceration rather than treatment, , an approach to incarceration that emphasizes punishment rather than rehabilitation, and aggressive over-policing – all strategies that have been proven to be ineffective over the past thirty years.
“Smart on crime” means we are addressing root causes of crime and rehabilitating people to prevent and discourage crime to begin with. “Smart on crime” means we do not focus solely on policing, but policing plus violence intervention programs, mental health services and addiction treatment, rec centers and summer jobs for teens, and apprenticeship programs that unlock economic opportunity.
We need investment in reentry programs for those who are incarcerated like Second Chance Pell, which I led on as Secretary of Education for President Obama, and other support for people who are released (like help finding jobs and housing) so that prison does not become a revolving door.
4) Does Maryland need to expand access to criminal records’ expungement for formerly incarcerated citizens who successfully complete their terms and remain law-abiding? Are the current statutes effective to ensure public safety and provide equitable access to employment?
Yes. Criminal records are a barrier to employment, which gets in the way of successful reentry. Formerly incarcerated citizens who successfully complete their sentences and remain law-abiding are not a threat to public safety. Many people eligible for expungement are either not aware they are and do not know how to go about the process, or are unable to afford court fees to do so.
We should be proactive in telling people they are eligible for expungement and provide the legal assistance if necessary, as well as waive court fees that are clearly a barrier to someone’s expungement. We also should get rid of the unit rule, that blocks people from expunging eligible charges if any other charges related to the same incident are not eligible to be expunged.
5) Do you support reform of our juvenile justice system (4 parts) to:a) seek less incarceration for lower level offenses and more diversion to treatment?b) prevent police from lying to juveniles to induce confessions?c) create a presumption of restorative justice remedies or school discipline for non-felony offenses occurring on school grounds?d) support treatment of juveniles who have been sex-trafficked as victims, not offenders?
A) Yes. B) Yes. Juveniles are impressionable and should not be pressured with false information, especially when there is often no guardian or lawyer present. C) Yes. This is also why I oppose federal or state funding for SROs in schools (as the presence of SROs is associated with higher rates of arrest and expulsion). To ensure the success of restorative justice approaches, we need significantly more investment in training for teachers and staff, school counselors, and school-based mental health services. D) Yes
6) In conclusion, what else would you like to tell voters about your criminal justice plans?
I will reimagine our approach to public safety. I believe in “policing plus.” We cannot use police as the single blanket-response to crime and public safety, and doing so has not worked.
Alongside policing that is respectful of citizens’ civil rights, I will invest in mental health services and addiction treatment, reentry supports, using and expanding Second Chance Pell in Maryland, invest in restorative justice and violence intervention programs like Safe Streets Baltimore, and ensure people’s needs are met so people are not forced to engage in “crimes of poverty.”
I will expand summer jobs programs, after school programs and local recreation centers, which have been shown to keep young people away from crime. I will invest in apprenticeship programs and pathways to employment (including high quality career and technical education in high schools).
During the past legislative session, I testified on much needed juvenile justice reform. I was proud to join advocates in testifying in support of reforming Maryland’s broken auto charging of minors as adults and youth interrogation standards that failed to require law enforcement to notify parents or legal guardians.
