When I first started to read The New Jim Crow, I was very skeptical of the book. The whole topic is very controversial and difficult to discuss. Nobody wants to admit that their legal/justice system has giant cracks within it. We all hope to live in a society where justice executed fairly and of course in a non-discriminatory manner. The author begins her analysis of mass incarceration with an introduction to its structure and policies within the legal system guarantee biased results.

After reading the first few chapters. I kind of realized the major issues at hand with our legal system. Michelle Alexander uses several Supreme Court cases that help to bolster her argument against the fairness of the legal system. The last few chapters of the novel describe the comparisons of mass incarceration to Jim Crow. The most obvious similarity between the two is marginalization of the African American community. The race of Americans is used as stigma just like the stigma of criminality. They function in a very similar manner.

In the last chapter, the author proposes a sort of “solution” to the major racial disparity that exists in our legal system. She suggests that only a social movement can weaken the caste system and legal laws will be futile without a grass roots movement. People have to acknowledge the shortcomings of our system and have to reach a consensus upon change. Her main point is that advocates have to realize and confront the role of race in our society, without this, a new caste will inevitably form upon the dismantling of the “old” one.

My question is: Did anyone have a change of heart regarding our legal system after reading The New Jim Crow?