ABSTRACT
This chapter discusses how all legal professionals involved in Operation Streamline felt some level of work-related role strain, defined as instances of problematizing Operation Streamline—such as explaining that they do not personally like it, or they think it is an ineffective program—despite continuing to participate. The two poles of work-related role strain experienced by almost all attorneys and judges were “substantive justice” and “formal justice.” Substantive justice involves interpreting the law using extra-legal norms and values. Formal justice has to do with following legal rules in a status-neutral way—the letter of the law. Latino/a attorneys and judges (90%) expressed more work-related role strain about being involved in Operation Streamline than non-Latino/as (43%) based on their shared social identities with defendants. The identity management strategy of identity consolidation is used by a majority of all respondents but used slightly more by Latino/a attorneys and judges. Latino/a attorneys and judges are also more likely than non-Latino/a attorneys and judges to use the management strategies of role making/identity extension, psychological compartmentalization, and fictive story telling while non-Latino/as use role playing more often.
