How many criminals are in the united states

She recently co-authored Arrest, Release, Repeat: How police and jails are misused to respond to social problems with Alexi Jones. He co-founded the Prison Policy Initiative in in order to spark a national discussion about the negative side effects of mass incarceration.

He is a co-author of a landmark report on the dysfunction in the prison and jail phone market, Please Deposit All of Your Money. The non-profit, non-partisan Prison Policy Initiative was founded in to expose the broader harm of mass criminalization and spark advocacy campaigns to create a more just society.

More recently, we analyzed the National Survey on Drug Use and Health , which includes questions about whether respondents have been booked into jail; from this source, we estimate that at least 4. The local jail population in the main pie chart , reflects only the population under local jurisdiction; it excludes the people being held in jails for other state and federal agencies. The population under local jurisdiction is smaller than the population , physically located in jails on an average day in , often called the custody population.

For this distinction, see the second image in the first slideshow above. In , there were 1,, drug arrests in the U. For more on how renting jail space to other agencies skews priorities and fuels jail expansion, see the second part of our report Era of Mass Expansion. For a description of other kinds of prison work assignments, see our analysis.

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics report Probation and Parole in the United States, , Appendix Table 3, 98, adults exited probation to incarceration under their current sentence; Appendix Table 7 shows 69, adults were returned to incarceration from parole with a revocation.

The federal government defines the hierarchy of offenses with felonies higher than misdemeanors. The felony murder rule has also been applied when the person who died was a participant in the crime.

For example, in some jurisdictions, if one of the bank robbers is killed by the police during a chase, the surviving bank robbers can be convicted of felony murder of their colleague. For example see People v. Hudson , Ill. Klebanowski , Ill. According to a recent New York Times article , the U. A small but growing number of states have abolished it at the state level. As of , nearly 9 out of 10 people incarcerated for immigration offenses by the federal Bureau of Prisons were there for illegal entry and reentry.

Most children in ORR custody are held in shelters. A small number are in secure juvenile facilities or in short-term or long-term foster care. With the exception of those in foster homes, these children are not free to come and go, and they do not participate in community life e.

Their behaviors and interactions are monitored and recorded; any information gathered about them in ORR custody can be used against them later in immigration proceedings. And while the majority of these children came to the U. Even outside of prisons and jails, the elaborate system of criminal justice system fines and fees feeds a cycle of poverty and punishment for many poor Americans. This is the most recent data available until the Bureau of Justice Statistics begins administering the next Survey of Inmates in Local Jails.

Notably, the number of people admitted to immigration detention in a year is much higher than the population detained on a particular day. The immigration detention system took in , people during the course of fiscal year Responses to whether someone reported being held for an authority besides a local jail can be found in V, or VV in the Survey of Inmates in Local Jails, Codebook.

Quick action could slow the spread of the viral pandemic in prisons and jails and in society as a whole. Help us find the facts We need your support to provide data-driven analysis that makes the case for ending mass incarceration. Our work is possible because of individual contributions:. Can you support us today?

And our other newsletters: Research Library updates? Prison gerrymandering campaign? Contact us to request a meeting. Recidivism: A slippery statistic How much do different measures of recidivism reflect actual failure or success upon reentry? Incarceration rates For the United States and other countries. Not directly comparable with past pie reports Before explaining the data sources, we want to explain two methodology changes that make this report not directly comparable with past reports.

Until last year , we included only youth who were detained because they were awaiting a hearing or adjudication. We included children held in the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement ORR in our immigration detention count in the main graphic, and in several detail slides. While these children are not held by ORR because of any criminal or delinquent charges, they are typically held in detention-like conditions; therefore, they fit into our holistic view of confinement in the U.

Data sources This briefing uses the most recent data available on the number of people in various types of facilities and the most significant charge or conviction. Our data sources were: State prisons: Vera Institute of Justice, People in Prison Table 2 provides the total yearend population. This report does not include offense data, however, so we applied the ratio of offense types calculated from the most recent Bureau of Justice Statistics report on this population, Prisoners in Table 13 as of December 31, to the total state prison population.

Jails: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Jail Inmates in Table 1 and Table 3, reporting average daily population and convicted status for midyear , and our analysis of the Survey of Inmates in Local Jails, 17 for offense types. See below and Who is in jail? Deep dive for why we used our own analysis rather than the otherwise excellent Bureau of Justice Statistics analysis of the same dataset, Profile of Jail Inmates, Federal: Bureau of Prisons: Federal Bureau of Prisons BOP Population Statistics , reporting data as of February 20, total population of , , and Prisoners in Table 15, reporting data as of September 30, we applied the percentage distribution of offense types from that table to the convicted population.

The number held in local jails came from our analysis of the Annual Survey of Jails data set, which showed that 23, people were held for the Marshals Service. It is worth noting that the U. Our data on youth incarcerated in adult prisons comes from Prisoners in Table 11, reporting data for December 31, , and youth in adult jails from Jail Inmates in Table 3, reporting data for the last weekday in June, For more information on the geography of the juvenile system, see the Youth First Initiative.

Our estimates of how many ICE detainees are held in federal, private, and local facilities come from our analysis of a comprehensive ICE detention facility list from November , obtained by the National Immigrant Justice Center.

The categories NGRI and GBMI are combined in this data set, and for pre-trial, we chose to combine pre-trial evaluation and those receiving services to restore competency for trial, because in most cases, these indicate people who have not yet been convicted or sentenced. This is not a complete view of all justice-related involuntary commitments, but we believe these categories and these facilities capture the largest share. Civil detention and commitment: At least 20 states and the federal government operate facilities for the purposes of detaining people convicted of sexual crimes after their sentences are complete.

These facilities and the confinement there are technically civil, but in reality are quite like prisons. People under civil commitment are held in custody continuously from the time they start serving their sentence at a correctional facility through their confinement in the civil facility.

Territorial prisons correctional facilities in the U. Territories of American Samoa, Guam, and the U. Virgin Islands, and U.

Indian Country correctional facilities operated by tribal authorities or the U. Military: Prisoners in Tables 18 for total population and 19 for offense types reporting data as of December 31, Probation and parole: Our counts of the number of people on probation and parole are from the Bureau of Justice Statistics report Correctional Populations in the United States, Table 1, Table 5 and Appendix Table 1, reporting data for December 31, , and were adjusted to ensure that people with multiple statuses were counted only once in their most restrictive category.

At the time of publication, newer data collected in was expected but not yet available. For readers interested in knowing the total number of people on parole and probation, ignoring any double-counting with other forms of correctional control, there are , people on parole and 3,, people on probation. For the U. We removed To avoid anyone in local jails on behalf of state or federal prison authorities from being counted twice, we removed the 80, people — cited in Table 17 of Prisoners in — confined in local jails on behalf of federal or state prison systems from the total jail population and from the numbers we calculated for those in local jails that are convicted.

To avoid those being held by the U. Marshals Service from being counted twice, we removed 23, Marshals detainees from the jail total that we found through our own analysis of the Annual Survey of Jails dataset. Again, we based these percentages on our analysis of the Profile of Jail Inmates, Marshals Service, or U.

As a result, the excessive sentencing practices in the U. This is partially a result of declining crime rates, but has largely been achieved through pragmatic changes in policy and practice.

For more than a decade, the political climate of criminal justice reform has been evolving toward evidence-based, commonsense approaches to public safety. This can be seen in a variety of legislative, judicial, and policy changes that have successfully decreased incarceration without adverse impacts on public safety. Just as a bicycle works best when it uses different gears based on the terrain, we need a justice system that has different responses for different situations—shifting gears to treatment, prevention, and long-term public safety solutions as appropriate.

By taking a practical approach to criminal justice reform, we can decrease crime, enhance public safety, and make more responsible use of our resources. View and compare key state criminal justice data The Sentencing Project compiles state-level criminal justice data from a variety of sources. Using our website's state-by-state data feature, you can navigate between interactive maps, tables, and rankings that allow you to access and use these data.

View State-by-State Data. International Rates of Incarceration per , State and Federal Prison Population, Even under the best conditions, incarceration can do great harm—not only to those who are imprisoned, but also more broadly to families, communities, and society as a whole. Moreover, the forcible deprivation of liberty through incarceration is vulnerable to misuse, threatening the basic principles that underpin the legitimacy of prisons.

The jurisprudence of punishment and theories of social policy have sought to limit public harm by appealing to long-standing principles of fairness and shared social membership. We believe that as policy makers and the public consider the implications of the findings presented in this report, they also should consider the following four principles whose application would constrain the use of incarceration:.

These principles ought to be seen as complementing rather than conflicting with the recent emphasis on offender accountability and crime control. Together, they help define a balanced role for the use of incarceration in U. Normative principles have deep roots in jurisprudence and theories of governance and are needed to supplement empirical evidence to guide future policy and research.

These judgments are informed by normative principles: basic ideals or values—often embedded in history, institutions, and public understanding—that offer a yardstick by which good governance is measured see, e.

We have looked at an anomalous period in U. Given the available evidence regarding the causes and consequences of high incarceration rates, and guided by fundamental normative principles regarding the appropriate use of imprisonment as punishment, we believe that the policies leading to high incarceration rates are not serving the country well.

We are concerned that the United States has gone past the point where the numbers of people in prison can be justified by social benefits. Indeed, we believe that the high rates of incarceration themselves constitute a source of injustice and, possibly, social harm.

A criminal justice system that made less use of incarceration might better achieve its aims than a harsher, more punitive system. In particular, they should reexamine policies regarding mandatory prison sentences and long sentences. Policy makers should also take steps to improve the experience of incarcerated men and women and reduce unnecessary harm to their families and their communities. We recommend such a systematic review of penal and related policies with the goals of achieving a significant reduction in the number of people in prison in the United States and providing better conditions for those in prison.

To promote these goals, jurisdictions would need to review a range of programs, including community-based alternatives to incarceration, probation and parole, prisoner reentry support, and diversion from prosecution, as well as crime prevention initiatives.

Given the evidence that incarceration has been overused when less harmful alternatives could plausibly achieve better individual and social outcomes, we specifically urge consideration of changes in sentencing and other policies.

We also propose that policy makers and citizens rethink the role played by prisons in addressing public safety and seek out crime reduction strategies that are more effective and less harmful.

In many cases, alternatives to incarceration would be more practical and efficient ways to achieve the same objectives. Although a comprehensive review of the research on noncustodial sanctions and treatments was not part of our charge, that research could provide policy makers with guidance on when and how to substitute these alternatives for incarceration. To minimize harm from incarceration, we urge reconsideration of the conditions of confinement and programs in prisons.

Given that nearly all prisoners are eventually released, attention should be paid to how prisons can better serve society by addressing the need of prisoners to adjust to life following release and supporting their successful reintegration with their families and communities.

Reviews of the conditions and programs in prisons would benefit from being open to public scrutiny. One approach would be to subject prisons to systematic ratings related to their public purposes. Such ratings could incorporate universal standards that recognize the humanity and citizenship of prisoners and the obligation to prepare them for life after prison.

We offer more specific suggestions for reconsideration of incarceration policies in three domains—sentencing policy, prison policy, and social policy. The evidence does not provide explicit guidance for a comprehensive reexamination of current sentencing policies. Details of strategies for reducing incarceration levels will depend on a complex interplay between the public and policy makers.

Yet the evidence points to some sentencing practices that impose large social, financial, and human costs; yield uncertain benefits; and are inconsistent with the long-standing principles of the jurisprudence of punishment.

Specifically, the evidence suggests that long sentences, mandatory minimum sentences, and policies on enforcement of drug laws should be reexamined. Given how damaging the experience of incarceration can be for some of those incarcerated and in some cases for their families and communities, we propose that steps be taken to improve the conditions and programs in prisons in ways that will reduce the harmful effects of incarceration and foster the successful reintegration of former prisoners when they are released.

Solutions to these problems are outside the criminal justice system, and they will include policies that address school dropout, drug addiction, mental illness, and neighborhood poverty—all of which are intimately connected to incarceration. If large numbers of intensely disadvantaged prime-age men and women remain in, or return to, poor communities without supports, the effects could be broadly harmful.

Sustainably reducing incarceration may depend, in part, on whether services and programs are sufficient to meet the needs of those who would. Thus, policy makers and communities will need to assess and address the availability, accessibility, and quality of social services, including drug treatment, health care, employment, and housing for those who otherwise would be imprisoned.

Recognizing that the knowledge base for many policies related to incarceration is limited, we urge the research community to work closely with the national and state governments and nongovernmental institutions to develop an ambitious and multifaceted portfolio of study to fill knowledge gaps in this field.

For policy and public understanding, more studies are needed of the effects of various sanction policies, including those involving incarceration, on crime.

The availability and effectiveness of alternatives to help achieve a just and safe society without a heavy reliance on incarceration need to be thoroughly studied. The design and evaluation of promising alternatives to incarceration are of critical importance to this proposed research portfolio. Such a research program would expand the options of state officials for responding to the problem of crime. Scholars should also be engaged in policy discussions about the costs and benefits of various changes in sentencing policy that would reduce rates of incarceration.

Researchers should expand the number of systematic evaluations of prison-based programs, aid in the development of evidence-based policies that promote humane prison conditions, and help design and evaluate reentry programs that support successful reintegration. Finally, when these interventions have proven effective, the research community should offer its expertise to assist in bringing them to scale.

After decades of stability from the s to the early s, the rate of imprisonment in the United States more than quadrupled during the last four decades.

Just under one-quarter of the world's prisoners are held in American prisons. Prisoners often carry additional deficits of drug and alcohol addictions, mental and physical illnesses, and lack of work preparation or experience. The growth of incarceration in the United States during four decades has prompted numerous critiques and a growing body of scientific knowledge about what prompted the rise and what its consequences have been for the people imprisoned, their families and communities, and for U.

The Growth of Incarceration in the United States examines research and analysis of the dramatic rise of incarceration rates and its affects. This study makes the case that the United States has gone far past the point where the numbers of people in prison can be justified by social benefits and has reached a level where these high rates of incarceration themselves constitute a source of injustice and social harm.

The Growth of Incarceration in the United States recommends changes in sentencing policy, prison policy, and social policy to reduce the nation's reliance on incarceration. The report also identifies important research questions that must be answered to provide a firmer basis for policy. The study assesses the evidence and its implications for public policy to inform an extensive and thoughtful public debate about and reconsideration of policies.

Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website. Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book. Switch between the Original Pages , where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter. Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available. Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free?

Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.