his Issue addresses a problem that is now receiving heightened attention: the reentry of incarcerated offenders into their communities and legal and practical obstacles to JL their successful reintegration. Almost 500,000 inmates are released from state pris ons every year. Many of them are insufficiently supervised upon release; a substantial number will find themselves back in prison within a short period of time. Because of the harm such a cycle inflicts upon the individuals and the communities from which they hail, a number of public and private organizations are now addressing how to assist ex-offenders upon their release while guaranteeing public safety. The growth of the incarcerated population in the last two decades has made the question of reentry increasingly pressing. Two million offenders are incarcerated in local, state and federal institutions across the country. Various organizations are studying the obstacles ex-offenders face, designing pro grams to remedy some of the most glaring hurdles and administrative deficiencies, and devel oping legislative and judicial strategies to limit the negative consequences of restrictions on ex-offenders while providing incentives for them not to re-offend. Involved in this new approach are governmental units such as the U.S. Department of Justice and its National Institute of Justice (nij), private research organizations such as the Vera Institute of Justice and the Open Society Institute's Center on Crime, Communities and Culture, and state agencies such as the New York State Task Force on Parole. The Criminal Justice Section of the American Bar Association has been working on a draft resolution urging reconsideration of statutory collateral consequences in light of the desirability of reintegrating offenders into society. Some groups provide funding and coordination for reentry projects while others lobby for different approaches. The articles here focus on two aspects of life after imprisonment: First, Marc Mauer and Robert Musser each talk about different sets of legally imposed collateral consequences. Mauer highlights the disenfranchisement of ex-offenders ? 3.9 million Americans are cur rently denied the right to vote. How many suffer from employment restrictions or the denial of welfare benefits remains unknown because of the panoply of federal and state limitations on the social, political and economic rights of ex-felons. These officially decreed effects of a criminal conviction, which are the focus of Robert Musser's article, may cause reintegration problems for offenders upon release, and perpetuate their stigmatization as ex-offenders. Whether they serve any salutary benefit as incentives or deterrents depends on the type of restriction and on the individual offender. Second, Laurie Robinson and Jeremy Travis focus on practical obstacles offenders face upon discharge. They describe the recently established reentry court and reentry partnership initiatives sponsored by the Department of Justice. Both initiatives are based on the assump tion that reentry poses criminal justice, public health and economic challenges. The present situation bears out these considerations: Almost two-thirds of all ex-offenders convicted in state court are rearrested within three years of their release, and one-third return because of parole violations. To assist offenders in readjusting to life after prison and to reduce re-offend ing, communities and governmental agencies must develop collaborative strategies with grad uated sanctions and built-in incentives. Offenders have always faced detrimental consequences upon release. They have encoun tered societal prejudices and stigma. Private employers are frequently reluctant to hire ex-con victs. State and federal governments have imposed a panoply of legal barriers upon them, To assist offenders in readjusting to
Read full abstract
May 9, 2013
Caitlin J Taylor 
Open Access