The case that brought the COMPAS risk assessment technology into the view of the mainstream media.
by Jack Kile, 2021
In 2016, the COMPAS risk assessment technological tool made its way into mainstream media with the Wisconsin supreme court case Loomis v. Wisconsin. This sparked many questions and debates about said technology used in the case. Everyone in the judicial field wanted to know more about this case, and the future impact of it. The case occurred as follows. According to Harvard Law Review, the state of Wisconsin charged Eric Loomis with five criminal counts related to a drive-by shooting in La Crosse in 2013. Loomis plead innocence to being involved in the event but stated that he did drive the car that was used in the shooting later that day. He plead guilty to two other charges, unrelated to the drive-by crime itself. Before his sentencing Loomis took the COMPAS questionnaire, and it considered him at high risk to recommit crime. The court was only privy to this information, as the defendant had no clue that it was being used to determine his sentencing. This led him to six year of jail time and five years of extended supervision. Loomis tried to argue that the COMPAS technology violated his due process. He did not get the justice he deserved.
This whole algorithmic influence of sentencing is a huge issue in the lends of sociology, and this case is a prime example of it. Now this has nothing to do with the racial biases of the technology, but it does a whole lot with stereotyping and discrimination. Considering him a man and his answers to vague questions, he was put at a disadvantage in this court case. Men have a much higher chance of getting worse sentences than women, just because the algorithm states that they do. Now sexism usually has men on the benefitting end of the spectrum in America, but this institutional discrimination should not be taken lightly. If it was a woman in the exact same situation, would we have the same outcome? Or would this process have gone differently? The court should look at everyone equally, and this algorithm is increasing inequality in more ways than one.
Sources
-Shapiro, D. M., & Gonnerman, M. (2017, March 10). State v. Loomis. Harvard Law Review. Retrieved December 2, 2021, from https://harvardlawreview.org/2017/03/state-v-loomis/.
-Stevenson, D. (2020, November 24). State v. Loomis (Wisc. 2016) - Algorithmic Sentencing Decisions & Due Process. Youtube. Retrieved December 2, 2021, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3nLztSaHkw.
-Giddens, A., Applebaum, R. P., & Carr, D. (2021). Chapters 10 & 11. In M. Duneier (Ed.), Introduction to Sociology(Seagull, Vol. 12, pp. 1–855). essay, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Comments