ABSTRACT
Popularized through the work of Yale law professor Tom Tyler, procedural justice has come to represent the idea that the way defendants are treated in court can matter as much as—if not more—to them as the substantive outcome. Proponents suggest that the experience of procedural justice legitimizes the authority of the criminal justice system and thereby elicits voluntary compliance with the law. Examining recent research conducted by the Center for Court Innovation in Newark, New Jersey, Cleveland, Ohio, and New York City, however, this chapter argues for a more nuanced and modest view of procedural justice in the criminal court setting. Viewing procedural justice in the courtroom as both a useful tool for advancing reform and a legitimate end in itself, this chapter cautions against overreliance on it as a decontextualized and ahistorical means for legitimizing the courts and the broader criminal justice system. The chapter concludes on a cautionary note about overselling procedural justice as a means for increasing compliance with court orders and the law.
