| Part of a series on | ||||||||
| Chicanos andMexican Americans | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 | ||||||||
Literature
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
Visual art
| ||||||||
Gringo justice is a sociohistoricalcritical theory developed byChicano sociologist, lawyer, and activistAlfredo Mirandé in 1987, who used it to provide an alternative explanation for Chicanocriminality in theUnited States and challenge theracist assumption that Chicanos wereinherently criminal, or biologically, psychologically, or culturally predisposed to engage incriminal behavior. The theory is applied by Chicano andLatino scholars to explain thedouble standard ofjustice in thecriminal justice system betweenAnglo-Americans and Chicanos/Latinos. The theory also challengesstereotypes of Chicanos/Latinos as "bandidos," "gang-bangers," and "illegal alien drug smugglers," which have historically developed and are maintained to justifysocial control over Chicano/Latino people in the United States.[2][3]
Scholars cite how Latinos are far more likely than Anglo-Americans to beincarcerated, rather than grantedprobation, when convicted of afelony offense (even when appropriate legal variables are considered), that Latinos are handed down significantly longerprison sentences (particularly in regard to felonydrug offenses), and that Latinos areracially profiled at disproportionate rates, as evidence of contemporary gringo justice. Latinos are also overrepresented in theprison population and as victims ofpolice shootings with deadly force. However, scholars note that the topic remains relatively unexplored and neglected, partially attributing this to a lack of interest but also to difficulties in conducting research on Latinos in the criminal justice system because of the way they areracially classified in the US.[1][4]
Gringo justice is applied against Chicanos and Latinos by the Anglo-American criminal justice system in order to maintain their social, economic, and political domination inmodern capitalist society,[3] so that they can remain, as Mirandé states, "a vital source of cheap and dependent labor for the developing capitalistic system."[2] Scholars also note that maintaining gringo justice works to reduce "any threat to conceptions of ethnic superiority that may be held by some whites."[5]
Alfredo Mirandé states that he used the term gringo justice because it would have been illogical in his view to characterize the American criminal justice system as anything other than an unjust system for Chicanos, or a system that only worked for white people. As Mirandé describes:
Titles such asLaw, Justice, and the Chicano andChicanos and the Legal and Judicial System were considered and discarded because they implied that the American legal and judicial system had been just and equitable in its treatment of Chicanos. The titleGringo Justice seemed to more accurately capture the reality of the Chicano experience before the American tribunals.
In his book Gringo Justice (1987), Mirandé outlines the theoretical underpinnings of gringo justice. He then lists the basic or essential components of gringo justice. These basic principles of the theory are explained by Mirandé as follows:[2]
Mirandé also connects gringo justice to the inequitable treatment ofBlack Americans within the criminal justice system in his bookGringo Injustice (2019), stating that "it is neither possible nor desirable to be indifferent or neutral toward racism or the prevailing unequal system of justice in the United States."[1]
Gringo justice is used to describe instances in which Chicanos and Latinos experience unjust and unequal treatment within any facet of the United States criminal justice system, both in historical and contemporary contexts. It has been applied by scholars to describe or explain the following instances:
A central aspect of the theory of gringo justice is challenging stereotypes of Chicanos and Latinos as inherently criminal, which have been and continue to be perpetuated in Anglo-American society. Scholars acknowledge that an understanding of gringo justice provides an alternative explanation to the criminal stereotypes of Chicanos and Latinos. Some of the stereotypes have been acknowledged as follows:[2]
The historical roots of gringo justice are based in the movement of white Americans from theeast coast into thenorthern territories of Mexico (Alta California,Santa Fe de Nuevo México, andCoahuila y Tejas), who brought with them racist ideas of Anglo superiority and domination. As described by historian Ed A. Muñoz, "not surprising, these Anglo American immigrants in the northern borderlands came to view Mexicans as a subhuman and inferior mongrel race due to their centuries-old African, Indian, and Europeanmestizaje, or racial/ethnic mixing." Mexican land soon became the object of desire for Anglo American settlers under ideas ofmanifest destiny and the desire to expandslave states westward (slavery was abolished in Mexico in 1829; it was not abolished in the United States until 1865). For Anglo settlers, "Mexican lands were a fountain of resources for a burgeoning U.S. society bent on spreadingmodern capitalist society around the globe."[3]
In 1836, Anglo immigrants in Texas declared independence from Mexico and Mexican officials refused to recognize this claim as it was an infringement on theirsovereignty. This resulted in an open conflict between Anglos and Mexicans, which has roots in the development of the stereotype of the Mexican bandit. As described by Muñoz, "oddly enough it was Mexican resistance to American aggression and illegal colonizing that led to the evolution of the Mexican 'bandido' stereotype. This negative icon portrayed Mexicans as bloodthirsty savages filled with wanton lust for American land and women and worked to justify sustained skirmishes in disputed lands." Texas wasannexed in 1845. As a violation ofinternational law, this effectively resulted in theMexican-American War (1846-1848). Following the war, Mexicans still within the borders of what was now the United States, were transformed from Mexican citizens "into a dependent labor force for southwestern commercial agriculture and industrialization."[3]
Mexicans were stripped of social, economic, and political rights which had been outlined in theTreaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848) and were increasingly portrayed as criminal and subjected to violent policing by groups such as theTexas Rangers. The U.S. government completely erased Article X of the treaty which guaranteed "the validity of land grants distributed by Mexican authorities before the war," which made many Mexicans landless. Anglo vigilante groups, both formal and informal, also attacked Mexicans, who becamesecond-class citizens. Mexicans who resisted this violence likeGregorio Cortez,las Gorras Blancas, andJuan Cortina were labelled as outlaws by Anglos, but became champions among some Mexican American people along the border "because they openly resisted the legal andextralegal takeover of Mexican lands, suppression of Mexican civil rights, and the violation of Mexican families."[3]
This resistance, along with further displacement of Mexican revolutionaries from Mexico into the southwestern United States and conflicts withPancho Villa's revolutionary army, contributed to the rise of "a notion of unpatriotic disloyalty among the U.S. Mexican-origin immigrant and nonimmigrant population." However, the need for Mexican labor soared in the American capitalist system, which led to increasingbarrioization or hyper-segregation of Mexicans into areas with poor infrastructure and opportunities by the early 20th century. In these spaces, Mexicans were criminalized at a level unprecedented in Anglo-American communities. Scholars have compared this toJim Crow laws applied toBlack people inthe South. During the Great Depression, Mexican labor was suddenly treated as disposable because of the collapse of the American economy, which resulted in theMexican Repatriation (1929-1936)[3] in which 400,000 to 2 million Mexicans were deported from the United States against their will (it is estimated that about 60% of them were birthright citizens of the United States).[7]
By the 1940s, thepachuco subculture had emerged in open defiance and resistance to this system of gringo justice, embracing a style of dress and social behavior that was widely condemned by Anglo-American society and also by more assimilationist-focusedMexican Americans. Anglo-American hatred for pachuco defiance culminated in the open attacks on Mexican American zoot-suiters by white servicemen in the Zoot Suit Riots. While Mexicans were largely the victims of the attacks, they were arrested by the police while servicemen went free.[3] Some police officers reportedly joined in on the rioting and attacks.[8] The local press praised the attackers and described the riots as a "cleansing effect" to freeLos Angeles of Mexican "miscreants" and "hoodlums."[9] Over 500 Latinos were arrested and charged with "rioting" and "vagrancy." The zoot suit garment itself was also criminalized in the city, as the city council stated it represented "hoodlumism."[8]
