When someone walks out of jail or prison, they are technically free.
But reentry often comes without support.
And without access to housing, mental health care, and employment opportunities, that freedom can quickly become another form of punishment.
While reentry is often seen as a social services issue, the truth is this: judges and prosecutors are complicit when the system fails to provide appropriate resources to people they helped incarcerate.
The Forgotten Phase of Justice: Life After Release
Courts focus heavily on sentencing: how long, under what conditions, and with what supervision someone will serve time. But what happens after that sentence ends is rarely treated with the same urgency and often ignored.
People are released with little more than a bag of belongings and a list of parole conditions, often into environments that lack the support necessary to keep them from returning to jail.
Judges and prosecutors are hands down part of the ecosystem that drives incarceration. Yet when people reoffend due to a lack of housing, medical care, or job access, these same officials have the audacity to express misguided outrage, blaming the individual rather than society’s structural failings.
Reentry Failure Is a Systemic Failure, Not a Personal One
Studies have shown that successful reentry reduces recidivism and improves public safety.
According to the National Institute of Justice, more than two-thirds of released prisoners are rearrested within three years, many for technical violations or survival-based crimes tied to poverty and instability.
When someone is set up to fail, their return to jail is not a reflection of their character. Instead, it’s a reflection of a system that chose not to invest in their future.
And judges and prosecutors, with their power and discretion, must bear responsibility for that.
The Role of Judicial and Prosecutorial Discretion
Judges can recommend and advocate for reentry support in their sentencing and parole decisions.
Prosecutors can develop and push for alternatives to incarceration, such as diversion programs, and supervised release plans that center rehabilitation.
Yet in many jurisdictions, these actors wash their hands of responsibility the moment a sentence is handed down.
That has to change.
A Call for Accountability
Judges and prosecutors must be evaluated not only on conviction rates or case closures, but on long-term community outcomes.
That includes:
- Tracking the success and failures of reentry in their jurisdiction
- Advocating for funding and policy changes that support rehabilitation
- Taking responsibility when their decisions contribute to a cycle of recidivism
If You Can Sentence Someone, You Should Be Accountable for What Happens After
We cannot talk about justice without talking about what happens after prison.
And if judges and prosecutors are so hell-bent on sending people there who will rejoin a community (because statistically most people will) they owe taxpayers for the time and hassle. They need to make sure that people have the resources to succeed, thrive, and contribute to their communities when they come back to the community.
Anything less is political theater and an outright self-indulgent waste.
Until prosecutors and judges are held accountable for post-release outcomes, the system will continue to cycle people in and out of incarceration without addressing root causes.
Because freedom without support isn’t freedom at all.
It’s a trapdoor.
