Studies indicate that several components of the STAR and Harlem programs would improve Reentry Court outcomes and help returning citizens overcome the experiential deficits and obstacles that incarceration creates.157
157Though it is not the focus of this Note, this author would be remiss not to acknowledge that, by their nature, reentry courts work with participants who have already been shaped by their time behind bars. Changes to the prison experience itself could give prisoners a better foundation for when they reenter society, reducing their likelihood to recidivate. Compare Obama, supra note 50, at 830-33 (discussing how reforms to policies such as solitary confinement and prison education can reduce recidivism); Phil Pruit & Chance Seales, Paying for Prisoners’ Educations Could Save Us Millions of Dollars, Newsy (Mar. 27, 2018), newsy.com/stories/ paying-for-prisoners-educations-saves-us-millions (last visited Feb. 8, 2019); Francis Cullen et al., It’s Hopeless: Beyond Zero-Tolerance Supervision, 15 Criminology & Public Policy 1215, 1217-222 (discussing the pitfalls of “swift-and-certain” punishment), with Reddy & Levin, supra note 26, at 238 (exploring how performance-incentive funding and “swift-and-certain sanctions” are effective prison reform tools). With these in mind, it is likely that a holistic review and overarching change to how and why we imprison people will be needed to most effectively address the recidivism issue.
