The Future of Problem-Solving Courts: Inside the Courts and Beyond

I appreciate the invitation from the University of Maryland School of Law to participate in this Symposium on problem-solving courts and thank the faculty and student organizers of the University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class for arranging the event and for their warm hospitality. Through my participation in the Symposium and the conversations I had with other Symposium participants, I have refined my thinking about problem solving courts, the problems which find their way into these courts, and the goals of such courts in implementing remedial solutions to social problems. I have increasingly come to value community-based approaches to many of the issues addressed in problem-solving courts. Such strategies reflect that seeking recourse in the formal criminal justice system should, whenever possible, be a measure of "last resort."' This Article considers my experiences conducting field research in a variety of problem-solving courts across southern California and the implications of my observations for understanding how problem-solving courts may improve in the future, including how problem-solving efforts outside the courts can be expanded.

On a micro-analytic level, I have found that not all problem solving courts or judges are alike and that some practices and courts seem to work better than others. It is thus useful to ground our understanding of "what works" in problem-solving courts in large part on close observations, detailed descriptions, and systematic analysis of the actual day-to-day happenings "inside" specific problem-solving courts in local jurisdictions. On a macro-analytic level, the operation of the entire criminal justice system, not just the courts, must be considered (e.g., criminalization of "offenses," policing practices, and prosecutorial charging decisions). The larger context of social problems in the society "outside" of the courts must be addressed as we formulate and implement alternative solutions to social problems. A focus on "what works" in problem-solving courts and in community-based settings should acknowledge the need to grapple with fundamental social and structural inequities. This includes poverty, unemployment, and lack of access to health care and education. These are inextricably connected to the societal and crime "problems" which end up in problem-solving courts. I am one of the first to emphasize that broader structural solutions to these inequities are needed before an adequate remedy to such intractable social problems is possible.