IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/doi10.1086-731081.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Assessment as Policy in Immigration Detention Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • David K. Hausman

Abstract

A large literature examines the effects of algorithmic risk assessments on judges’ bail decisions in criminal cases. This article examines these effects in the immigration detention context. In 2017, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement changed its risk-assessment tool. Before the change, the tool could recommend detention, release, or referral to a supervisor; afterward, it did not recommend release—ever. Taking advantage of the suddenness of this change, I show that the removal of the release recommendation reduced actual release decisions by about half, from around 10 percent to around 5 percent of all decisions. Officers continued to follow the tool’s detention recommendations at only a slightly lower rate after the change, and when officers did deviate from the tool’s recommendation to order release, supervisors became more likely to overrule their decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • David K. Hausman, 2025. "Risk Assessment as Policy in Immigration Detention Decisions," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 68(1), pages 103-119.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/731081
    DOI: 10.1086/731081
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/731081
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/731081
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/731081?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/731081. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.