F or nearly 30 years, a vast body of literature has examined the “get-tough” era, or what some have referred to as mass incarceration (Jacobson, 2005) or a punitive policy experiment (Raphael and Stoll, 2009). In examining the policies that have defined this era (e.g., War on Drugs, minimum mandatory sentencing, habitual offender statutes, three strikes, and truth-in-sentencing), the literature has been both incisive and comprehensive in its coverage. Various trends have been documented, effectiveness has been analyzed and disputed, explanations have been proposed and debated, and social implications have been identified and interpreted. As the ability to sustain “get-tough” measures has now been constrained [by fiscal crisis], a different political tone and policy focus is emerging. Much of the penal research has shifted as well, turning to issues of offender reentry or to new insights about the trajectory of mass incarceration. Lynch’s (2011, this issue) work clearly falls into the latter category by challenging the prior literature and its conventional argument about the locus and direction of penal change. Her work has relevance then for understanding not only mass incarceration in particular but also reform policy in general, including offender reentry. Lynch (2011) identifies four legal factors as the “engine that propelled mass incarceration.” These factors include legislative and other statutory changes to penal codes, federal case law related to litigation on overcrowding, postsentencing law and policy related to parole, and the day-to-day sentencing and punishment practices of local courtrooms. However, rather than adopting an aggregated or nationalized view of the scope and impact of these factors, Lynch offers a more nuanced take based on local social and political contexts. She maintains that, although the capacity or opportunity for mass incarceration might have been established at the macrolevel, the realization of mass incarceration was contingent on local or regional responses to state or federal initiatives.