Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Marijuana legalization won’t stop racially skewed arrests. But it limits them.

One of the most common arguments for marijuana legalization is getting a little more complicated.

A new preliminary report by Mike Males at YouthFacts found that the marijuana arrest rate dramatically dropped — by 76 percent between 2008 and 2014 — in five states after they legalized or decriminalized the drug, as one would expect. In comparison, marijuana arrest rates in all other states fell by just 15 percent in the same time period.

But it also found that the racial disparities within those arrests didn’t improve, even though black people aren’t more likely to use or sell drugs than their white peers.

So in Colorado, which legalized pot in 2012, the total number of marijuana arrests fell by 60 percent from 2008 to 2014. But racial disparities remained: Black Coloradans were still more than twice as likely to be arrested for pot as people of other races. (Even though Colorado legalized marijuana, people can still be arrested for possessing an amount of pot above a certain threshold and public use.)

But this doesn’t necessarily mean marijuana legalization was an ineffective way to reduce racial disparities in the criminal justice system. After all, the report found that black people still benefited the most from the change: The marijuana arrest rate per 100,000 black people in Colorado dropped by nearly 300 (to 242.2), while the rate for people of all other races dropped by nearly 160 (to 103.8).

Why did black Coloradans disproportionately benefit? Consider implicit bias, subconscious biases against people of different races and ethnic backgrounds. These biases may drive a cop to, for example, see a black man smoking pot as a criminal who needs to be arrested and a white man smoking pot as a mere troublemaker who can be let off with a warning.

This kind of discrimination is limited under legalization: With one less crime to charge people with, cops are less able to use racially biased discretion in deciding whether to arrest someone.

The argument for marijuana legalization’s effects on racial disparities, then, isn’t really that it will undo all bias in arrests. But it will help — by limiting the discretion cops and other actors in law enforcement can use to disproportionately criminalize black people. Until systemic prejudices like implicit bias are fixed, that may be the best option.

More in Politics

Podcasts
The Supreme Court abortion pills case, explainedThe Supreme Court abortion pills case, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

How Louisiana brought mifepristone back to SCOTUS.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Politics
Trump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expectedTrump’s China policy is nearly the exact opposite of what everyone expected
Politics

As Trump heads to China, attention and resources are being shifted from Asia to yet another war in the Middle East.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Are far-right politics just the new normal?Are far-right politics just the new normal?
Politics

Liberals are preparing for a longer war with right-wing populists than they once expected.

By Zack Beauchamp
The Logoff
Flavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA headFlavored vapes doomed Trump’s FDA head
The Logoff

Why Marty Makary is out at the FDA, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters
Politics
Virginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymanderVirginia Democrats’ irresponsible new plan to save their gerrymander
Politics

Democrats just handed the Supreme Court’s Republicans a loaded weapon.

By Ian Millhiser
The Logoff
Can Trump lower gas prices?Can Trump lower gas prices?
The Logoff

What suspending the gas tax would mean for you, briefly explained.

By Cameron Peters