How Blind Is Justice? Ideology and Terrorism Prosecution Outcomes

• In Event: Innovations in the Empirical Study of Terrorism

Abstract

Although legal definitions of terrorism are ideologically blind, singling out no particular philosophy or group, prosecution outcomes may depend on the defendant’s political orientation. This paper examines prosecution outcomes in the United States for defendants charged with terrorism and other felonies involving illegal political violence. Using original data from the Prosecution Project (tPP), we compare outcomes using two operationalizations: conviction vs. acquittal and the length of sentence. Our covariates include the defendant’s ideology (left, right, religious, etc.), the charge (terrorism, arson, etc.), the extent of injuries and property damage caused by the offense, jurisdiction of trial, state versus federal charges, the defendant’s race and gender, and the number of co-conspirators. Our results suggest that defendants’ politics may indeed influence prosecution outcomes, contrary to the normative expectation that justice should be ideologically blind.

Author

• Joseph Brown, University of Massachusetts Boston