In partnership with Verite News and as part of ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network, an article has been produced to highlight the implications of recent legislative changes in Louisiana affecting the parole process for prisoners.
Significant changes in parole regulations have been introduced in Louisiana under Governor Jeff Landry, transferring considerable authority from the parole board to an algorithm called TIGER. The algorithm has been criticized for preventing thousands of prisoners from being considered for early release, as it assesses an immutable risk score focused on static factors, disregarding efforts at rehabilitation. This approach has raised concerns, particularly among civil rights attorneys, who argue that the algorithm could exacerbate racial disparities impacting Black prisoners more adversely.
The story of Calvin Alexander illustrates the consequences of these legislative changes. Alexander, a 70-year-old inmate serving a sentence for drug charges, was informed that he was no longer eligible for parole just months before his intended hearing. Despite participating in anger management courses, learning a trade, and maintaining a clean disciplinary record, a computerized scoring system labeled him as a moderate risk of reoffending. Under the new law, this label prevents Alexander and thousands of other prisoners from appealing their cases to the parole board.
The law reflects Governor Landry’s tough-on-crime agenda, significantly restricting parole eligibility. It utilizes the TIGER risk assessment tool, which judges prisoners based on unchangeable past factors, hence overlooking their in-prison rehabilitation efforts. Nearly half of the state’s prison population has been assigned moderate to high-risk ratings by this system, thereby excluding many from parole consideration.
These legislative changes have drawn criticism from criminal justice experts and former parole board members, who argue that such measures undermine rehabilitation efforts and could lead to constitutional challenges due to their retrospective application. Former parole board member Pearl Wise emphasized the importance of acknowledging prisoners’ personal transformations over time. Experts, including those involved in the algorithm’s development, have expressed that TIGER was intended as a rehabilitative tool rather than a basis for denying parole.
Critics also note the potential racial biases inherent in the algorithm’s reliance on historical data points like employment and criminal history, which disproportionately affect Black prisoners due to broader systemic inequalities.
Despite this, state officials, including the Louisiana Board, have defended the reforms, attributing them to efforts in enhancing public safety. However, data does not support claims of increased parole efficiency; instead, there has been a notable decline in the number of parole hearings and paroles granted, raising concerns about the legislation’s true impact on the prison population and taxpayers.
For prisoners like Calvin Alexander, these reforms represent a formidable barrier to securing early release, and for many, present a prospect of completing sentences under harsh conditions, without the hope of demonstrating personal reforms to the parole board.