Why criminal justice reform should be at the top of Trump’s agenda
By Tia Reddy
President Trump in a Manhattan court facing charges in his hush money case.
On January 20th, 2025, Donald J. Trump was sworn in as the 47th president of the United States. However, just six months prior, he had been found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records. This marked an unprecedented moment in American history, as it was the first time a sitting president held the title of a convicted felon. While the charges he faced could have carried a sentence of up to four years in prison, he instead received an unconditional discharge—a ruling that effectively dissolved any legal consequences because of his role as the president elect. Despite this, Trump continued to claim that the case was an “injustice to justice.” While debates over his guilt or innocence persist, the fact remains that the new president enters the White House with a unique perspective: having experienced the legal system first-hand. This experience could set him up to push for meaningful reform, particularly in criminal justice. Given his continued assertion of innocence, despite his conviction, Trump now carries a responsibility to address the very system that convicted him. However, unlikely as it may be, Donald Trump has identified a problem that affects millions of Americans annually. It is his job to address it. Whether or not one agrees with the verdict, it is clear that Americans deserve an answer to the problems ingrained in the criminal justice system.
The criminal justice system is in need of repair. In the 1970s, the United States had nearly 360,000 incarcerated Americans; Today, that number has skyrocketed to 1.9 million. Additionally, the United States has the highest number of inmates per 100,000 citizens of any country in the world, reflecting its high incarceration rate. While there is no denying the genuine intention of reform and rehabilitation within the American prison system, the execution of these processes is far less effective than intended.
This system drives the American recidivism rates, the percentage of convicted felons returning to federal prison within five years, to be much higher than those of comparable Western countries. For example, compared to the Scandinavian countries, which have a recidivism rate of 20 to 30 percent, the United States has a rate of 76 percent. This number highlights a critical flaw in the way rehabilitation and reintegration are handled in the U.S.
In contrast, countries like Norway and Sweden focus more on restorative justice and offer extensive educational and psychological programs to prepare inmates for a smooth transition back into society. There is no doubt of the significant difference between the two countries’ approaches to rehabilitation, with many Nordic countries providing a lenient environment for their inmates. While ethical problems emerge with the easygoing environment created by the Nordic prison style, the underlying message is clear: They have learned to rehabilitate. The United States, on the other hand, has failed at this. Despite America’s seemingly ineffective system, the federal government funnels over $80 billion dollars per year into the prison system, not including the cost of social programs or the financial burden on families affected by incarceration. The social costs extend far beyond the prison walls. Families torn apart by incarceration, often for extended periods of time, experience economic hardship, mental health challenges, and community disintegration. The communities most affected are those of low-income families and people of color, who are disproportionately impacted compared to other demographics.
This racial disparity is most commonly attributed to the school-to-prison pipeline, which highlights the path that many students face in schools with inadequate resources, specifically when it comes to behavioral issues. Because of the lack of funding in these schools, students who are deemed unwilling to cooperate are not provided with the support or resources they need to succeed. Instead, they are pushed toward punitive measures, often leading to high dropout rates, poor educational outcomes, and in some cases, admittance into juvenile detention facilities. For those in the juvenile facilities, 60 percent of the youths come from families with an annual income of less than 20,000 dollars. Another 20 percent come from families with less than 30,000 dollars annually. This conclusion only solidifies that the problems within the prison system are deeply ingrained in these economic disparities.
The juvenile detention systems are intended to be rehabilitative; however, the children in the system are rarely given the same educational opportunities or resources that students in mainstream public schools receive. Instead, they face overcrowded classrooms, limited access to skilled educators, and a curriculum that does little to prepare them for success once they are released. In state prisons, the average education level is 10th grade with around 70 percent of the inmates never having received a high school diploma. These disparities create an uneven playing field, making it harder for these young individuals to reintegrate into society and contribute positively after their release, further perpetuating the cycle of incarceration. Compared to the general public whose highest unemployment rate sat at 15 percent during COVID, inmates face an unemployment rate of 60 percent to this day. To fix this problem, Trump needs to address the disparities in education and opportunities for low-income communities. Improving the quality of education in these communities, particularly in schools that serve at-risk students, would provide more opportunities for success and reduce the likelihood of school failure, which is closely linked to criminal activity. Programs focused on mental health, trauma-informed care, and conflict resolution should be incorporated into the school curriculum to prevent students from being funneled into the criminal justice system in the first place.
Trump does not relate to the strife of many people in the prison system. His belief that he was slighted by his wrongful convictions is not a unique experience. Trump claims he was wrongfully convicted—though there is little evidence to support this claim—so in his mind he joins the five to six percent of Americans who face wrongful conviction. However, contrary to the rest of the American public, Trump’s charges hold little weight given he received an unconditional discharge as a result of his responsibilities as president. The judge deemed that the prison sentence he would otherwise have received would cause too much turmoil for the country. However, the millions of mothers, fathers, and caregivers who go through the prison system, are not provided with the same luxuries. Their responsibilities, jobs, children, and futures are affected.
Leave a Reply