I think that social science would do well to stop contributing to the tendency of some sectors to dismiss it as a “science.” I dont think the Supreme court made the wrong decision in this. I think it is an unfortunate decision, in that I DO believe that the poor in general, and poor minorities in specific are treated very unjustly by our justice system.

I personally am opposed to the death penalty period. Because mistakes CAN be made, and ARE made, I do not feel it is ever just to hand out a sentence that cannot be overturned should new evidence surface. Life without parole serves the same function in removing the person from society, yet allows the possibility that the person can be given some of their life back if new technology should prove them wrongfully convicted.

However, the quality of evidence on racism, and the presentation of that evidence needs to be improved. Moreover, it needs to be stripped of its own racial bias, and any tendency to overstate the prevalence. If that would happen, if there was a move to greater objectivity, inclusiveness, and more stringent methodology, I think that the the social sciences would be in a position to make a greater impact on the racism that does exist in this country.

Actually, this is one of the areas where we probably agree. Although I am basically in favor of the death penalty, its actual practice has become so rare — and so arbitrary — that you have ask whether any benefit from it outweighs the cost.

The problem with legal institutions, such as criminal punishment, is that they are not inherently self-correcting. In the market, if I discriminate irrationally based on race, I will be punished until I correct my irrationality. Not so when sentencing criminals. Furthermore, the courtroom is the kind of forum where very base emotions (e.g., in-group status, us versus them) can be exploited.

Ideally, the death penalty would be used properly. The next best thing may be not to use it at all.