Discrimination based on skin tone

Part of a series on
Discrimination
Forms Institutional Structural
Attributes Age Caste Class Dialect Disability Genetic Hair texture Height Language Looks Mental disorder Race / Ethnicity Skin color Scientific racism Rank Sex Sexual orientation Species Size Viewpoint
Social Arophobia Acephobia Adultism Anti-albinism Anti-autism Anti-homelessness Anti-drug addicts Anti-intellectualism Anti-intersex Anti-left handedness Anti-Masonry Antisemitism Aporophobia Audism Biphobia Clannism Cronyism Elitism Ephebiphobia Social determinants of health Social determinants of health in poverty Social determinants of mental health Fatphobia Gayphobia Gerontophobia Heterosexism HIV/AIDS stigma Homophobia Leprosy stigma Lesbophobia Discrimination against men Misandry Misogyny Nepotism Pedophobia Perpetual foreigner Pregnancy Reverse Sectarianism Supremacism Black White Transphobia Non-binary Transmisogyny Vegaphobia Xenophobia
Religious Ahmadiyya Atheism Baháʼí Faith Buddhism Catholicism Christianity post–Cold War era Falun Gong Hinduism Persecution Untouchability Islam Persecution Jehovah's Witnesses Judaism Persecution LDS or Mormon Neopaganism Eastern Orthodox Oriental Orthodox Protestantism Rastafari Shi'ism Sufism Zoroastrianism
Ethnic/national Afghan African Albanian Arab Armenian Asian France South Africa United States Assyrian Azerbaijani Black people African Americans China South Africa Bengali Catalan Chechen Chinese Croat Filipino Finnish French Georgian German Greek Haitian Hazara Hispanic Hungarian Igbo Indian Indigenous people Australia Canada United States Iranian Irish Israeli Italian Japanese Jewish Korean Kurdish Lithuanian Malay Mexican Middle Eastern Mongolian Pakistani Palestinians Pashtun Polish Quebec Romani Romanian Russian Serb Slavic Somali Tatar Thai Turkish Ukrainian Uyghur Venezuelan Vietnamese
Manifestations Anti-LGBT rhetoric Blood libel Bullying Cancel culture Capital punishment for homosexuality Compulsory sterilization Corrective rape Counter-jihad Cultural genocide Defamation Democide Disability hate crime Dog whistle Economic Education Employment Eliminationism Enemy of the people Ethnic cleansing Ethnic conflict Ethnic hatred Ethnic joke Ethnocide Forced conversion Freak show Gay bashing Gendercide Genital modification and mutilation Genocide examples Glass ceiling Hate crime LGBT Hate group Hate speech Homeless dumping Housing Indian rolling Intersectionality Lavender scare LGBT grooming conspiracy theory List of people killed for being transgender Lynching Mortgage Murder music Native American mascots Braves Blackhawks Chiefs Occupational segregation Persecution Pogrom Political repression Purge Racialization Religious persecution Religious terrorism Religious violence Religious war Scapegoating Segregation academy Sexual harassment Sex-selective abortion Slut-shaming Trans bashing Victimisation Violence against women White flight White genocide conspiracy theory Wife selling Witch-hunt
Policies Age of candidacy Blood purity Blood quantum Crime of apartheid Disabilities Catholic Jewish Gender pay gap Gender roles Gerontocracy Gerrymandering Ghetto benches Internment Jewish quota Law for Protection of the Nation MSM blood donation restrictions Nonpersons Numerus clausus (as religious or racial quota) One-drop rule Racial quota Racial segregation Jim Crow laws Nuremberg Laws Racial steering Redlining Same-sex marriage (laws and issues prohibiting) Segregation age racial religious sexual Social exclusion Sodomy law State atheism State religion Ugly law Voter suppression
Countermeasures Affirmative action Anti-discrimination law Cultural assimilation Cultural pluralism Diversity training Empowerment Fat acceptance movement Feminism Fighting Discrimination Hate speech laws by country Human rights Intersex human rights LGBT rights Masculism Multiculturalism Nonviolence Racial integration Reappropriation Self-determination Social integration Toleration
Related topics Allophilia Amatonormativity Bias Christian privilege Cisnormativity Civil liberties Dehumanization Diversity Ethnic penalty Eugenics Figleaf Heteronormativity Human-oriented sexualism Internalized oppression Intersectionality Male privilege Masculism Medical model of disability autism Multiculturalism Net bias Neurodiversity Oikophobia Oppression Police brutality Political correctness Polyculturalism Power distance Prejudice Prisoner abuse Racial bias in criminal news in the United States Racism by country Religious intolerance Second-generation gender bias Snobbery Social exclusion Social identity threat Social model of disability Social stigma Speciesism Stereotype threat The talk White privilege
v t e

Discrimination based on skin tone, also known as colorism or shadeism, is a form of

Colorism focuses on how racism is expressed in the psychology of a people and how it affects their concepts of beauty, wealth, and privilege. A key difference between racism and colorism is that while racism deals with the subjugation of one group by another or the belief in racial supremacy, colorism deals with in-group discrimination in addition to between-group discrimination.^[2]

Research has uncovered extensive evidence of discrimination based on skin color in criminal justice, business, the economy, housing, health care, the media, and politics in the United States and Europe. In addition, there has been research that evidently shows biases based on skin color in the educational system. Students of color are facing higher education costs and inequalities in advanced programs and are targeted by their teachers or peers from other marginalized groups. In addition to this issue being documented in the United States, lighter skin tones have been considered preferable in many countries in Africa, Asia, and South America.^[3]

Although less historically significant, prejudice within groups can also be applied toward lighter-skinned people, which is known as reverse colorism.^[4]

Worldwide

Racism affects almost every aspect of contemporary life. Research shows that ethnic minorities are offered fewer opportunities in higher education and employment, are subject to increased scrutiny by police, and are less likely to receive adequate care from physicians.^[5]

Several meta-analyses find extensive evidence of ethnic and racial discrimination in hiring in the North American and European labor markets.^[6][7][8] A 2016 meta-analysis of 738 correspondence tests in 43 separate studies done in OECD countries in 1990–2015 finds that there is extensive racial discrimination within both the European and North American hiring processes.^[7] Equivalent minority candidates need to send around 50% more applications than majority candidates to be invited for an interview.^[7] Recent research in the U.S. shows that socioeconomic and health inequality among African Americans along the color-continuum is often similar or even larger in magnitude than what exists between whites and African Americans.^[9][10]

Africa

During the European colonial period, travelers in Africa emphasized and added to a European discourse of black womanhood that attributed a big body to all black women. This was a symbol of 'otherness', their inferior phenotype, and backward culture and intellect.^[11]

In some parts of

In the 21st century, 77% of Nigerian women, 52% of Senegalese women, and 25% of Malian women are using lightening products.^[12][14] Der Spiegel reports that in Ghana, "When You Are Light-Skinned, You Earn More", and that "[s]ome pregnant women take tablets in the hopes that it will lead their child to be born with fair skin. Some apply bleaching lotion [...] to their babies, in the hopes that it will improve their child's chances."^[13]

Asia

East Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia

This section possibly contains synthesis of material which does not verifiably mention or relate to the main topic. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. (March 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

In East, South, and Southeast Asia, a preference for lighter skin is prevalent,^[17] especially in countries such as China, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Vietnam, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, and Japan.^[18][19][20]

The history of skin whitening in East Asia dates back to ancient times. In the ancient dynastic eras, to be light in an area where the sun was harsh implied wealth and nobility, because those privileged persons could stay indoors while servants had to labor outside.^[17] "Jade" white skin in Korea, for instance, is known to have been the ideal as far back as the Gojoseon era.^[18] Japan's Edo period saw the start of a trend of women whitening their faces with rice powder as a "moral duty".^[18] Chinese women valued a "milk white" complexion and swallowed powdered pearls towards that end.^[18]

In the early 21st century, four out of ten women surveyed in Hong Kong, Malaysia, the Philippines, and South Korea reported using a skin-whitening cream.^[21]

The historical preference for light-skinned women in East Asia is quite different from more recent Western culture, where women of tan and brown complexions are preferred. But color preferences were again associated with privilege: tanning was associated with people who had the leisure for vacations and time to tan. Bonnie Adrian writes that American culture makes white women feel inferior for having pale complexions and reddish features, and that she risked skin cancer and wrinkles trying to darken her pale skin.^[22]

According to 21st-century research, women in China have recently asserted tan skin as the new female beauty ideal, which they view as healthier and more attractive. According to Tai Wei Lim, Chinese women in the media now sport bronze complexions, and this is viewed as a reclamation of women's autonomy from the fading Chinese patriarchy.^[23]

Japan

Hiroshi Wagatsuma writes in Daedalus that Japanese culture has long associated skin color with other physical characteristics that signify degrees of spiritual refinement or degrees of primitiveness.^[24]

The scholar repeats an old Japanese proverb: "white skin makes up for seven defects."^[24] More specifically, for a woman, very light skin allows people to overlook her lack of other desirable physical characteristics.^[24] Skin color influenced and continues to influence people's standards of attractiveness, socioeconomic status, and capability.^[24]

During the

A survey concluded that three-quarters of Malaysian men thought their partners would be more attractive if they had lighter skin complexions.^[17]

In certain Southeast Asian countries such as

Despite the controversy surrounding the preference for Malaysians who are of mixed Asian (Malay, Chinese, or Indian) and European descent and possess features such as fair skin, some other experts in the industry have said that the use of pan-Asian faces can be used to promote the racial diversity of Malaysians. As the Minister of Information had suggested in 1993, such faces can also be used to promote a product to a diverse racial demographic because of their mixed appearance.[27]

India

The implications of colorism in India have been apparent since the nation's conception. The legacies of

Colorism in India was also fed by the attitudes of Europeans, who favored lighter-skinned people for administrative positions and other prominent social positions, so power was conceptually intertwined with light skin.[30] Rich Indians often tend to be light-skinned due to less exposure to the sun. Also, individuals were judged by their occupation. Being born into a lineage of, say, farmers would typically make one unable to leave said lineage. Migration between occupations was rare, and though the caste system's legality was altered in 1948, it is still influential and practiced in many parts of the country.^[31] As these factors generated the caste system, it grew to include both economic standing and societal positioning.^[32] Existing prejudices also influenced European officials. This sentiment remains.

Colorism has societal implications, many of which severely harm the socioeconomic mobility of darker-skinned Indians. These can manifest in gender stereotyping and regional discrimination. Studies of melanin index (MI) in individuals across regions show that there are variations in skin color, which contribute to the level of discrimination darker-skinned individuals face in these respective regions.

Other forms of colorism in India can be seen in the cosmetic industry, where "fairness" creams meant to lighten skin are popular.

Fair skin is a beauty ideal in contemporary Sri Lankan society but has its roots in ancient beauty ideals in the country. Fairness products and other products that include whitening agents are commonly sold in Sri Lanka and are popular among females.[50] Fair-skinned actors and actresses feature prominently in Bollywood films and Korean dramas, both of which are widely popular and influential in Sri Lanka.^[51]

United Arab Emirates

In many places, people with white skin get better treatment and salaries.^[52]

Europe

A 2019 report by Universities UK found that students' race and ethnicity significantly affect their degree outcomes. According to this report from 2017–18, there was a 13% gap between the likelihood of white students and Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) students graduating with a first or 2:1 degree classification.[54]^[55]

A 2023 University of Cambridge survey that featured the largest sample of black people in Britain found that 88% had reported racial discrimination at work, 79% believed the police unfairly targeted black people with stop and search powers, and 80% definitely or somewhat agreed that racial discrimination was the biggest barrier to academic attainment for young black students.^[56]

Latin America

Brazil

A 2016 study, using twins as a control for neighborhood and family characteristics, found that the nonwhite twin is disadvantaged in the educational system.[61] A 2015 study on racial bias in teacher evaluations in Brazil found that Brazilian math teachers gave better grading assessments of white students than equally proficient and equivalently well-behaved black students.^[62]

A 2018 paper found that discriminatory hiring and retention policies accounted for 6–8% of the overall racial wage gap.^[63]

Chile

In Chile, there is a wide range of diversity from other cultures and ethnic backgrounds. The diversity in Chile sees colorism through social-economic status, accommodating the preexisting notion that darker skin complexions are less valued. A 2016 study found that Chilean schoolteachers expected less from their dark-skinned students (morenos) than they expected from their light-skinned students (blancos).^[64] Even the differences between being dark and being tanned carry different types of status: being tanned means that people have enough money to go to the beach and buy tanning products. Due to the history of colonization, being darker-skinned (and likely descended from enslaved Africans) means that people are automatically considered members of the lower classes. Current studies have revealed that many Chileans want to have lighter pigmentation. Whiteness is also associated with economic standing; a mixed-race person may be considered "white" if they are obviously educated and successful.

Mexico

A 2017 study revealed a 45% gap in educational achievement between the darkest- and lightest-skinned White Mexicans and that wealth in the country similarly correlated to skin color.^[65]

Colorism in Mexico is an ongoing problem that strongly affects people of darker skin tones there. Color can affect Mexican citizens' daily lives, their ability to get jobs, and their basic self-esteem. Mexicans have a long history of ancestry from sources other than indigenous peoples: Spanish, African, German, and other Europeans. The number of Mexicans who identify as mixed race increased from 3 million in 2010 to more than 20 million in 2020 as more individuals began to acknowledge mixed race. Skin color for Mexicans can range from white to black; more than half of Mexican citizens identify as mestizo or mixed race.^[1]

A study by Vanderbilt University found that darker skin is strongly associated with decreased wealth and less education. According to Mexico’s National Statistics and Geography Institute, the darker the skin tone, the less upward mobility a Mexican citizen may have. This study revealed that Mexicans with the darkest skin tones were the least likely to have finished elementary school. Simultaneously, those with lighter skin tones were more likely to have a university degree. Some of these differences are also attributed to economic differences between people's families of origin, which create gaps between groups.

These findings also indicate that skin tone appears to be associated with educational achievement. Mexicans with the lightest skin tones complete an average of 11 years of schooling, while dark-skinned Mexicans finish an average of 5.3 years of school. A maximal change in skin tone, from lightest to darkest, is associated with a decrease of almost 6 years of schooling, a 51.8% reduction in education.^[66] Lighter-skinned Mexicans were more likely to hold positions of power, while those with darker skin tones were more likely to have positions that required a lower level of qualifications.^[67] According to a study by Vanderbilt University, the average Mexican household income was about US$193 a month, while lighter-toned citizens reported an average income of US$220 a month.^[1] Darker-skinned citizens earned almost 42% less than their white counterparts: US$137 a month.^[1] Overall, Mexican populations with lighter skin fall into the highest wealth brackets in Mexico, while those with darker skin fall the lowest.

The average Mexican is located within the 3rd and 4th wealth quintiles, while Mexicans with darker skin tones are averaged below the 2nd wealth quintile. A maximal change in skin tone in Mexico, from lightest to darkest, is associated with a 51.5% decrease in material wealth.^[66] This study also found that while 2.5 percent of white Mexicans surveyed by Vanderbilt’s pollsters don’t have running water, upward of 11 percent of dark-skinned citizens said they lack this basic necessity. Similarly, 7.5 percent of white Mexicans reported lacking an in-home bathroom, while 20 percent of dark-skinned Mexicans lacked such convenience.^[1] Researchers concluded that not only does the color of one's skin in Mexico negatively predict economic and educational outcomes, but it is also among the strongest factors found in this study.^[66]

Mexico had traditionally celebrated its "raza mestiza", or mixed-race society. For example, in 2017, President Enrique Peña Nieto declared "el mestizaje" (mixed race) "the future of humanity." Although more than half of Mexico’s population identifies as mixed race, race and skin color have a greater effect on Mexicans' human development and capital accumulation than any other variable. Vanderbilt’s results show that the skin color gap in Mexico is two times the achievement gap between northern and southern Mexicans, something that is often referred to in Mexico.^[1] Vanderbilt’s study shows that the skin color gap is five times greater than the urban/rural divide in Mexico. It has a significantly greater effect on wealth and education than ethnicity (indigenous versus white or mixed) does.^[1]

When Aeromexico recruited new employees, they specified "nadie moreno", or no dark-skinned people. This type of colorism and racism in Mexico is often ignored or explained by cultural divides. Because Mexico consists of ethnic, cultural, and linguistic diversity, many Mexicans argue that darker-skinned citizens tend to live in historically disadvantaged and highly indigenous areas.^[1]

United States

History

European colonizers created a racial hierarchy and a race-based ideology, which led to the formation of a structural system of oppression that benefited individuals of European descent over individuals of African descent. Biological differences in skin color were used to justify the enslavement and oppression of Africans and Native Americans, leading to the development of a social hierarchy that placed people of European descent at the top and people of African descent at the bottom. Enslaved people with lighter complexions (usually stemming from the sexual assault of enslaved African women) were allowed to perform less strenuous tasks, like domestic duties, while darker-skinned enslaved people were forced to engage in hard labor, which they usually performed outdoors.^[68]

African-Americans with greater European ancestry and a lighter skin color were considered smarter than and therefore superior to their darker-skinned counterparts. As a result, they were given greater opportunities for education and the acquisition of land and property.^[69] Colorism was a device used by European colonists to create division between enslaved Africans and further the idea that being as close to white as possible was the ideal image. One of the first forms of colorism was slave owners deciding that only light-skinned enslaved people would work in the house while the darker-skinned ones were subjected to the harsh conditions of the fields.^[70] This practice led to a clear division between the slaves, undermining their solidarity against the slave owners.

A variety of specific cutoff tests for skin color emerged; the most famous one was the

According to the Pew Research Center, 62% of US Latinos say that having a darker skin color affects their ability to get ahead.[82] This study also showed that 59% of Latinos say that having a lighter skin color helps Hispanic people get ahead.^[82] 57% say that discrimination based on skin color towards Latinos is a "very big problem" in the US.^[82] Another survey by the Pew Research Center shows that Hispanics with darker skin color are more likely to have experienced at least one instance of discrimination than those with lighter skin color.^[82] This study also showed that 42% of Hispanics with darker skin have experienced discrimination or were treated with prejudice by someone who is not Hispanic, while only 29% of those with lighter skin say the same happened to them.^[82] Additionally, 41% of Hispanics with darker skin say they have experienced discrimination by someone who is Hispanic, while only 25% of those with lighter skin color say they have experienced the same.^[82] According to these findings, those with darker skin and lighter skin alike feel that skin color affects opportunities and life in the US. For example, 62% of darker-skinned Latinos feel that skin color shapes daily life, while 57% of lighter-skinned Latinos feel the same. Colorism can also affect how Hispanic Americans relate to one another. According to the Pew study, nearly half of Hispanic adults say they have often or sometimes heard a Hispanic friend or family member make comments about other Hispanics that might be considered racist or racially insensitive. About half of Latinos feel that discrimination based on race or skin color is a very big problem.^[82]

Business

A 2014 meta-analysis of racial discrimination in product markets found extensive evidence of minority applicants being quoted higher prices for products.^[6] A 1995 study found that car dealers "quoted significantly lower prices to white males than to black or female test buyers using identical, scripted bargaining strategies."^[83] A 2013 study found that eBay sellers of iPods received 21 percent more offers if a white hand held the iPod in the photo than a black hand.^[84]

A 2014 study in the Journal of Economic Growth found that anti-black violence and terrorism, as well as segregation laws, reduced the economic activity and innovation of African Americans.^[85]

Today, the "thick" black female body is celebrated within the black community, but according to critical race theorist Gentles-Peart, this does not negate the persistance of white colonialist views that presented black women's stereotypically "thicker" bodies as unattractive.^[11]

African-Americans have historically faced discrimination in terms of getting access to credit.^[86] A 2020 audit study of 17 banks found that black business owners who sought loans under the Paycheck Protection Program got substantially worse treatment than white business owners.^[87] Bus drivers engaged in substantial discrimination against black passengers relative to white passengers.^[88]

Criminal justice

Research suggests that police practices such as racial profiling, over-policing in areas that are populated by minorities, and in-group bias may all result in disproportionately high numbers of racial minorities among crime suspects.^{[89][90][91][92][93][94][excessive citations]} Research also suggests that there is discrimination in the judicial system, which contributes to a higher number of convictions and unfavorable sentencing for racial minorities.^{[95][96][97][98][99][100][101][102][103][excessive citations]} Further research indicates that even when controlling for income and all other factors, children from father-absent families (mother only, mother-stepfather, and relatives/other) were much more likely to be incarcerated.^[104] The disproportionate single-parent households of black youths to those in white family structures is 64% to 24% as of 2019.^[105]

Policing, arrests, and surveillance

A 2019 study, which made use of a dataset of the racial makeup of every U.S. sheriff over a 25-year period, found that "the ratio of Black-to-White arrests is significantly higher under White sheriffs" and that the effects appear to be "driven by arrests for less-serious offenses and by targeting Black crime types."^[106]

In-group bias has also been observed when it comes to traffic citations, as black and white cops are more likely to cite out-groups.^[91]

A 2019 study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology found that facial-recognition systems were substantially more likely to misidentify the faces of racial minorities.^[107] Some ethnic groups, such as Asian-Americans and African-Americans, were up to 100 times more likely to be misidentified than white men.^[107]

A 2018 study in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that tall young black men are especially likely to receive unjustified attention by law enforcement.^[108] The authors furthermore found a "causal link between perceptions of height and perceptions of threat for Black men, particularly for perceivers who endorse stereotypes that Black people are more threatening than White people."^[108]

Analysis of more than 20 million traffic stops in North Carolina showed that blacks were more than twice as likely as whites to be pulled over by police for traffic stops and that blacks were more likely to be searched following the stop. There was no significant difference in the likelihood that Hispanics would be pulled over, but Hispanics were much more likely to be searched following a traffic stop than whites. When the study controlled for searches in high-crime areas, it still found that police disproportionately targeted black individuals. These racial disparities were particularly pronounced for young men. The study found that whites who were searched were more likely to carry contraband than blacks and Hispanics.^[109][110] A 2020 study in the journal Nature found that black drivers were stopped more often than white drivers and that the threshold by which police decided to search black and Hispanic drivers was lower than that for whites (judging by the rate at which contraband was found in searches).^[111] A 2021 study in the Quarterly Journal of Economics found similar results.^[112] A 2021 study in the American Economic Review found that minorities were significantly less likely to receive discounts on their traffic tickets than white drivers; the study estimated that 42% of Florida Highway Patrol officers practiced racial discrimination.^[113]

A 2013 report by the American Civil Liberties Union found that blacks were "3.73 times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana possession", even though "blacks and whites use drugs, including marijuana, at similar rates."^[114]

Police killings and use of force

Racism is also present in policing. For instance, the United Kingdom's "stop and search" laws have been disproportionately used against black people, specifically black men. Excessive force against black people is also common in the United States. Police in the United States disproportionately killed unarmed black Americans compared to unarmed white Americans.

A 2018 study in the American Journal of Public Health found the mortality rate by police per 100,000 was 1.9 to 2.4 for black men, 0.8 to 1.2 for Hispanic men, and 0.6 to 0.7 for white men.^[119] Reports by the Department of Justice have also found that police in Baltimore, Maryland, and Ferguson, Missouri, systemically stop, search (in some cases, strip-search), and harass black residents.^[120][121] A January 2017 report by the DOJ concluded that the Chicago Police Department had "unconstitutionally engaged in a pattern of excessive and deadly force", and an independent task force created by the mayor of Chicago stated that police "have no regard for the sanctity of life when it comes to people of color."^[122] A 2018 study found that minorities were disproportionately killed by police, but that white officers were no more likely to use lethal force on minorities than minority officers.^[123] A 2019 study in the Journal of Politics found that police officers were more likely to use lethal force on blacks, but that this was "most likely driven by higher rates of police contact among African Americans rather than racial differences in the circumstances of the interaction and officer bias in the application of lethal force."^[124]

A 2019 study in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that blacks and American Indian/Alaska Natives are more likely to be killed by police than whites, and that Latino men are more likely to be killed than white men.^[125] According to the study, "for young men of color, police use of force is among the leading causes of death."^[125] A separate Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) study found that there were no racial disparities in police shootings by white police;^[126] the findings of the study were disputed by Princeton University scholars, who argued that the study's method and dataset made it impossible for the authors to reach that conclusion.^[127][128] The authors of the original PNAS study corrected their article following the criticism by the Princeton scholars.^[129] A study by Texas A&M University economists, which rectified some problems of selection bias identified in the literature above, found that white police officers were more likely to use force and guns than black police, and that white officers were five times as likely to use gun force in predominantly black neighborhoods.^[130] A 2020 American Political Science Review study estimated that 39% of uses of force by police against blacks and Hispanics in New York City were racially discriminatory.^[131]

Charging decisions

A 2018 study in the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies found that law enforcement officers in Texas who could charge shoplifters with two types of crimes (one more serious, one less so) due to a vaguely worded statute were more likely to charge blacks and Hispanics with the more serious crime.^[132]

A 2017 report by the Marshall Project found that killings of black men by whites were far more likely to be deemed "justifiable" than killings by any other combination of races.^[133]

Legal representation, bail decisions, trials, and convictions

A 2019 audit study found that lawyers are less likely to take on clients with black-sounding names than white-sounding names.^[134]

A 2018 study in the

A 2012 study found that "(i) juries formed from all-white jury pools convict black defendants significantly (16 percentage points) more often than white defendants, and (ii) this gap in conviction rates is entirely eliminated when the jury pool includes at least one black member."[97]

A 2018 National Bureau of Economic Research experiment found that law students, economics students, and practicing lawyers who watched 3D virtual reality videos of court trials (where the researchers altered the race of the defendants) showed a racial bias against minorities.^[136]

DNA exonerations in rape cases strongly suggest that the

Research has found evidence of in-group bias, where "black (white) juveniles who are randomly assigned to black (white) judges are more likely to get incarcerated (as opposed to being placed on probation), and they receive longer sentences."[99]

A 2018 study in the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics found that judges gave longer sentences, in particular to black defendants, after their favorite team lost a home game.^[138]

A 2014 study in the Journal of Political Economy found that 9% of the black-white gap in sentencing could not be accounted for.^[101] The elimination of unexplained sentencing disparities would reduce "the steady-state level of black men in federal prison by 8,000–11,000 men [out of the black male prison population of 95,000] and save $230–$320 million per year in direct costs."^[101] The majority of the unexplained sentencing disparity appears to occur at the point when prosecutors decide to bring charges carrying "mandatory minimum" sentences.^[101] A 2018 paper by Alma Cohen and Crystal Yang of Harvard Law School found that "Republican-appointed judges give substantially longer prison sentences to black offenders versus observably similar non-black offenders compared to Democratic-appointed judges within the same district court."^[139]

In criminal sentencing, medium- to dark-skinned African Americans are likely to receive sentences 2.6 years longer than those of whites or light-skinned African Americans. When a white victim is involved, those with more "black" features are likely to receive a much more severe punishment.^[140]

A 2016 report by the Sarasota Herald-Tribune found that Florida judges sentence black defendants to far longer prison sentences than whites with the same background.^[141] For the same drug possession crimes, blacks were sentenced to double the time of whites.^[141] Blacks were given longer sentences in 60 percent of felony cases, 68 percent of the most serious first-degree crimes, 45 percent of burglary cases, and 30 percent of battery cases.^[141] For third-degree felonies (the least serious types of felonies in Florida), white judges sentenced blacks to twenty percent more time than whites, whereas black judges gave more balanced sentences.^[141]

A 2017 report by the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) found, "after controlling for a wide variety of sentencing factors" (such as age, education, citizenship, weapon possession, and prior criminal history), that "Black male offenders received sentences on average 19.1 percent longer than similarly situated White male offenders".^[142][143]

A 2014 study on the application of the death penalty in Connecticut over the period 1973–2007 found "that minority defendants who kill white victims are capitally charged at substantially higher rates than minority defendants who kill minorities... There is also strong and statistically significant evidence that minority defendants who kill whites are more likely to end up with capital sentences than comparable cases with white defendants."^[144]

Prison system, parole, and pardons

A 2016 analysis by the New York Times found that "tens of thousands of disciplinary cases against inmates in 2015, hundreds of pages of internal reports and three years of parole decisions found that racial disparities were embedded in the prison experience in New York."^[145] Blacks and Latinos were sent more frequently to solitary and held there for longer durations than whites.^[145] The New York Times analysis found that the disparities were greatest for violations where the prison guards had much discretion, such as disobeying orders, but smaller for violations that required physical evidence, such as possessing contraband.^[145]

According to a 2011 ProPublica analysis, "whites are nearly four times as likely as minorities to win a pardon, even when the type of crime and severity of sentence are taken into account."^[146]

Education

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in