While eviction is a universally stressful event, people with mental health conditions can face unique obstacles with housing retention for reasons related specifically to their disability. This paper provides a review of housing settings and specific risks of eviction for individuals with mental illness before focusing on housing court and the challenges these individuals and court personnel face therein and identifies junctures at which supportive, problem-solving interventions can ensure the necessary community supports and legal representation.
Developed with support from the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Planning a Reentry Program: A Toolkit for Tribal Communities is designed to help tribal justice system practitioners create or enhance reentry programs for American Indians and Alaska Natives returning from jail or prison. It also offers guidance for practitioners who are currently working in a reentry program.
"Until you begin to deal with that hurt and that trauma on the inside, it's always going to affect you and the things that you do," says Timothy, a program manager for our Men’s Empowerment Program. We support the mental health of young men of color by helping address and break the cycle of trauma and violence in the lives of young Black and Brown men in Harlem, NYC. With a trauma-informed focus on healing, young men experience a positive shift in how they see themselves and how they can be a resource to their community and the world.
The Harlem Community Justice Center is a neighborhood-based community court committed to bridging the gap between the court and community to achieve fairness and systematic equity in housing, community health, and access to justice. We believe the community should have a voice in addressing its problems and defining justice, we and seek to empower communities to transform the systems that serve them.
Punishments for violating the terms of probation are a major driver of prison and jail populations across the country. Calls for meaningful reform are growing. This study examines the impact of New York City’s early efforts to shift to a more client-centered approach to probation, including improved case management and establishing neighborhood-oriented probation offices.
With justice systems across the country scrambling to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, there is a lot of talk about what justice is going to look like when the virus ends. But what has the response actually consisted of, and is there any reason to anticipate a "new normal" will emerge? On New Thinking, New York University law professor Rachel Barkow explains her skepticism.
Jails and prisons have quickly emerged as epicenters of the COVID-19 pandemic. As New York City struggled to get people out from behind bars, it turned to a trio of nonprofits to repurpose a successful program on the fly. The urgency of supporting people released abruptly from jail in the midst of a pandemic is clear, but so are the challenges. The experience also raises the question: what happens to criminal justice when the virus ends?
Jails and prisons quickly emerged as epicenters of the COVID-19 virus. In March 2020, with an outbreak poised to sweep through the Rikers Island jail complex, New York City asked us and the city's other two supervised release providers to offer remote supervision and referrals to services for people released early from a jail sentence. About 300 people were released into the program. Results after six months show the program is reducing health risks and ensuring public safety.
What if you brought together prosecutors and people they may have helped to incarcerate for a college seminar behind bars on the criminal justice system, and asked them to produce a list of policy recommendations? That's the premise of a novel experiment in prison education. On New Thinking, hear from Jarrell Daniels, a program graduate, and Lucy Lang, executive director of the Institute for Innovation in Prosecution, who conceived of the idea.
Rachel Barkow contends criminal justice policy is a “prisoner of politics,” driven by appeals to voters’ worst instincts and an aversion to evidence of what actually works. In her new book, the NYU law professor makes a provocative case for “freeing” criminal justice from the political imperative in order to achieve real reform.
