The article argues states should impose repeat‑offender sentencing enhancements keyed to prior felony counts (or severity) rather than rely on predictive reoffending tools. It claims criminal history predicts future offending across crime types and that persistent offenders don’t necessarily age out in their 30s.
— This reframes the risk‑assessment debate toward simple, auditable rules over opaque algorithms, with implications for fairness, effectiveness, and public safety.
Rafael A. Mangual
2026.04.17
80% relevant
The article highlights Jennifer Doleac’s argument for calibrated, evidence‑based reforms that privilege concrete outcomes (recidivism rates, targeted interventions like reminders or DNA databases) over broad, ideology‑driven leniency; this maps to the idea that sentencing and reform should rely on convictions and observed behavior rather than opaque risk‑score instruments or doctrinal frames.
2025.10.03
70% relevant
The 'Lock Up Repeat Offenders' item urges incapacitating the small cohort of high‑propensity offenders and cites extensive prior records, aligning with using criminal history rather than predictive scores to guide sentencing enhancements.
Jakob Dupuis
2025.10.02
100% relevant
The author proposes enhancements that apply the higher felony class’s maximum term based strictly on an offender’s prior convictions, rejecting predictive analytics.