One Law, Two Systems: The Role of Wealth, Influence, and Power Dynamics in U. S. Incarceration

By Grace Park

Incarceration is often seen as an individual crime or flaw- a term to describe punishments  resulting from one’s actions. Yet the incarceration system is far from impartial. Economic disparities have been a topic of concern for decades in the U.S. justice system. The system has shown time and time again the very inequalities it seeks to correct: low-income individuals being subject to mistreatment and deprived of the necessary tools of defense, while the rich use their wealth to their favor. After some time, it raises the question- is justice determined by evidence or one’s financial status?

Poverty is one of the many causes of incarceration. The vast gap between the wealthy and poor has taken over the legal system. Those of low income are more likely to experience encounters with law enforcement for minor violations, leaving them to deal with the justice system, where their vulnerability is magnified by their limited legal representation and restricted ability to bargain for pleas. As low income individuals are unable to afford the legal support necessary to defend themselves in court, they are given no other choice but to sit in jail for months or even years, waiting for trial, all because of their inability to afford bail, which wealthier inmates can pay easily.

On the other hand, those financially well-off face a completely different justice system. They have the advantage to secure top-class defense teams and have alternative sentencing options. Unlike the financially disadvantaged, they have the option to evade brutal punishments and may instead receive lighter sentences or minor charges. An example of this is the case of multi-millionaire Jeffrey Epstein, who was accused and tried for sexually abusing and trafficking numerous minors, but was able to evade drastic consequences due to his and bribing authorities with his wealth. Despite sweeping evidence, Epstein received a mere 13 months through a controversial plea deal in 2008 secretly issued by high position authorities and other prominent individuals, without informing the victims. His case demonstrates how wealth can insulate individuals from the justice system through hush money and network connections, as well as social influence.

Economic imbalance is not only a cause of incarceration but also a consequence of it. The rate of crime increased considerably during the late 1900s, with there being a direct correlation between the surge in incarceration and rising economic inequalities. This primarily stems from the financial disadvantages previously incarcerated individuals face when reintegrating into society. Studies have found those with a criminal record receive 52% less than average annual earnings, accumulating up to around 500,000 dollars. The vast gap in lifetime earnings traps the formerly incarcerated in a never-ending cycle of poverty and injustice, with many already being financially disadvantaged prior to their incarceration.

This economic disparity raises essential questions regarding the propriety and integrity of America’s criminal justice system. If the results of a trial can be influenced more by the size of one’s bank account than legal evidence, the system ceases to serve as a pillar for impartial justice and instead becomes an instrument to reinforce economic hierarchies and inequity. Justice becomes a privilege only accessible to those of the upper class, unaffordable to the disadvantaged.