Latino Criminology: Unfucking Colonial Frameworks in “Latinos and Crime” Scholarship

Introduction

Core aim: “unfuck” criminology by auditing and deconstructing colonial features in theory and practice; propose a forward-looking Latino criminology that intersects critical criminology and Latino Studies.
Key concept: Latino criminology centers margins and identifies areas of intervention to depart from settler-colonial and white supremacist inheritances in criminology.
Terminology note: author uses the term Latino as an intellectual provocation and to promote the issue’s themes; acknowledges debates around Latinx/Latino/a/x and related terms, while affirming respect for how communities want to be portrayed.
Organizing structure of the argument: Part I historical themes in critical criminology and Latino Studies; Part II critique of criminological theory and criminal justice systems via coloniality; Part III seven tenets of Latino criminology; Part IV inherent risks and limitations; Conclusion.
Central stakes: audit marginalization, connect CCJ with Latino Studies, and propose practical interventions to address interpersonal harms, racialized social control, and state violence.

Critical Criminology and Latino Studies: A Brief Reintroduction

US CCJ is diverse and left-of-center; ongoing work to audit marginalization and inequality inside/outside academia.
Latino criminology is framed as a research platform bridging critical criminology and Latino Studies; emphasizes urgency and transdisciplinary inquiry rather than parochialism.
Latino Studies is described as a political project focused on Latinos in the US, foregrounding legacies of colonialism and anticolonial scholarship; debates include Afro-Latino erasure, anti-capitalist/anti-colonial strands, and intra-Latino political divisions.
Latino Studies emerged from resistance to asymmetrical power in academia (e.g., student protests, formation of Chicano/a/x Studies and Puerto Rican Studies); it challenges Eurocentric whitewashing of histories.
The field faces political threats like attempts to ban ethnic studies (HB 2120 cited); the author emphasizes Latino Studies as a political location guiding inquiry to reflect and advance diverse Latino identities.
The Latino Studies–CCJ overlap is not automatic; it requires explicit engagement with empirical and theoretical links (e.g., on coloniality, state violence, transnational diasporas).
Example themes intersecting CCJ and Latino Studies include: transnational diasporas, legacies of colonialism, state violence, racialized dispossession, and the politics of citizenship.

Latino Studies and its Overlaps with CCJ

Latino Studies centers Latinos in the US with attention to ethnicity, race, space, and politics; debates include Afro-Latino visibility and intra-Latino diversity.
Latinos in the US are often treated as a coherent demographic group in broader scholarship, masking internal conflicts and colonial legacies.
Latinidad is a contested, politically charged category shaped by power asymmetries; it often implies a “mixed” heritage that can obscure Afro-Indigenous Latinos and reproduce anti-Blackness or anti-Indigenous bias.
Latinidad involves examining multiple axes: country of origin, ethnicity, skin tone, and racial subjectivity, all embedded in power hierarchies.
The Latino Studies project emphasizes colonial legacies and the political economy of race, often linking to CCJ concerns about criminalization, state violence, and social control.
The article provides an illustrative contrast with Latin Americanist/Global South strands, stressing that the Latino criminology project should be US-centered but in conversation with global perspectives.
Examples of Latino Studies issues intersecting CCJ: coloniality, state crimes, deportation regimes, migration controls, and the racialization of Latinos in law enforcement contexts.

Coloniality, Criminology, and Criminal Justice Systems

Core concept: to “unfuck” criminology, researchers must map colonial inheritances in knowledge and practice; Latino Studies offers historical primers for making coloniality legible to CCJ audiences.
Colonial logics persist in CCJ through racial capitalism, gendered and racialized social control, and eurocentric epistemologies.
Epistemic violence is twofold: (a) CCJ scholarship often advances racialized control; (b) silencing or deprioritizing non-Western perspectives that illuminate the origins of such controls.
Eurocentric racism has been naturalized in criminology as claims about race and disparate outcomes, without acknowledging historical material projects like slavery, settler colonialism, and dispossession.
The piece highlights historical transfer of positivist ideas (Beccaria’s Classical School, Lombroso’s Italian School) into Latin America and the Americas, used to justify coercive control and racialized categorization.
The 1885 Third International Penitentiary Congress in Rome featured Lombroso and other positivists; the text argues this framework provided an ideological basis for racialized economic subjugation and criminal anthropology in Latin America.
Brazil’s national motto “Ordem e Progresso” is invoked as a symbolic link to Positivist influence; the dominance of positivism in contemporary criminology is framed as continuing a colonial project.
The US and “developed” world maintain positivist paradigms that downplay political economy and state definitions of crime; the article calls for interrogating liberalism vs. colonialism, and questions the prevalence of neoliberalisms over neocolonialism terminology.
A key diagnostic: CCJ lacks a unifying paradigm; siloed labor and fragmentation hinder cross-disciplinary engagement with coloniality and state violence.
Practical takeaway: connect CCJ with Global South and LatCrit/Latino Studies insights to reframe how crime and justice are understood in a transnational context.

Latino Criminology Foundations

The Latina/o/x Criminology network (LatCrim) is a longstanding collaboration centered on Latinos in US crime and justice scholarship; includes 150+ scholars and mentors toward Latino scholars in criminology.
LatCrim faces underrepresentation: Latino representation among US higher-education faculty is < 5%.
Latino Criminology extends LatCrim’s aims by centering Latino Studies to augment criminology pedagogy and research; seeks to push CCJ toward underrepresented perspectives.
Prior research and debates cited include calls to incorporate Latinos and immigrants into policing research and a range of related works across sociology and criminology.
Despite these developments, many race-and-crime studies focus on Black vs White binaries, with gaps in understanding Latino subjectivities within policing and justice systems.
Empirical data gap: LeMAs data from 2013 show limited Latino representation in policing: as of 2014, 46.2% of nationally surveyed police organizations had zero Black full-time sworn personnel, and 48.2% had zero Hispanic or Latino full-time sworn personnel. ext{LEMAS (2013/2014): } 46.2 ext{ ext% Black void; } 48.2 ext{ ext% Latino void}.
These gaps motivate a Latino criminology that explicitly investigates Latino subjectivities in recruitment, retention, and experiences within police and justice systems.
The section also discusses broader Latino Studies themes: migration, colonization, and the political economy of Latino identities, urging cross-pollination with CCJ research.

Seven Provisional Pillars of Latino Criminology

From description to explanation, the project proposes seven pillars to guide Latino criminology.

1) Accuracy and Integrity of Race and Ethnicity Data

Data issues: Latinos are often measured with crude Black/White or White/non-White binaries; Latino subjectivities are variably operationalized, leading to questionable knowledge claims and policy implications.
Problems in measurement: “Add-Variable-and-Stir” approaches and evolving Latino categories in data collection.
Recommendations:
- Improve race/ethnicity measurement with sharper data collection and robust econometric methods.
- Revisit traditional theories with Latino-specific data to test assumptions (e.g., racial invariance).
- Apply advanced quantitative methods to reassess measurement of race/ethnicity in CJ data and policy.
Implications: Data quality shapes public policy and political debates about crime, race, and immigration; better data could recalibrate policy responses to Latinos in the CJ system.

2) Revisiting the Utility of CCJ Theories

Central question: Do orthodox CCJ theories meaningfully explain Latino crime, victimization, and criminalization?
Critiques of canonical theories: Racial invariance thesis challenges the assumption that core criminological theories apply identically across races/ethnicities.
Probing questions for theory revision:
- What do routine activities theory, social disorganization theory, or anomie theory offer for understanding the US-Mexico border human rights crisis or Latino youth violence?
- Are existing theories merely deflecting attention from white supremacist policies?
Call to action: Develop and test Latino-specific theoretical adaptations that illuminate pathways of victimization and state violence affecting Latinos.

3) Mentorship and Leadership

Academia as a “game” with rules about tenure, promotion, and labor divisions; risk of reproducing the status quo.
A Latino criminology should push for leadership and mentorship that advance collaboration across political locations within CCJ scholarship.
Emphasis on collaborative leadership and intergenerational mentoring to broaden perspectives beyond traditional “radical” or “orthodox” binaries.
Practical aim: broaden participation in CCJ if Latino criminology is to matter beyond siloed networks; cultivate inclusive leadership in journals, conferences, and editorial boards.

4) Migration, Mobility, and Transnationalisms

LatCrit and Latino Studies foreground migration sovereignty, borders, and transnational movement as central to Latinos’ experiences.
Proposes integrating nation-state border dynamics and transnational violence into criminological inquiry (e.g., borders, deportations, migrant policing).
Practical aim: study migration-related state violence as a core criminological issue rather than peripheral; connect US-based Latinos to global border regimes.

5) Centering State Crime

State crimes and state-corporate crime are central to Latino experiences, including mass deportations, immigration enforcement, and foreign policy-driven state violence.
Emphasizes that Latinos’ experiences are linked to both domestic and transnational states’ coercive actions.
The article argues for critical scholars to look beyond US borders and examine how Latinos navigate state and state-corporate crimes in various contexts.

6) Confronting Anti-Blackness and Ditching the Intellectual Vapidity of “Black and Brown”

Distinguishes anti-Blackness as a foundational cross-cutting racism and notes that “brown” categories can obscure anti-Black systems.
A Latino criminology should avoid flattening racial hierarchies into a simple Black/Brown spectrum; must address how Latinos experience anti-Black racism and patriarchy within carceral institutions.
Emphasizes that patriarchal and heteronormative violence underpin criminal justice institutions and state violence against women, particularly Black women, and that Latinos’ experiences cannot be reduced to a “middle ground” between White and Black.

7) Class Analysis and the Criminal Justice Classroom

Highlights class dynamics in CJ education and the experiences of working-class Black and Latino students who pursue CJ as a pathway to security.
Calls for examination of recruitment/retention patterns in law enforcement and CJ agencies, noting Latino representation in ICE and CBP (e.g., around half of CBP personnel being Latino in some estimates) and raising concerns about “locking up our own.”
Argues for integrating ethnic studies and Latino studies into CJ pedagogy to better prepare students for understanding race, class, and power in the justice system.
Data point referenced: diverse recruitment patterns and the potential for co-option of Latino communities within enforcement structures.

Caveats and Limitations of a Latino Criminology

Acknowledges risks of over-segmentation: creating a distinct Division of Latinos/Latinx could further silo scholarly labor and reify identity boundaries.
Cautions that a Latino criminology might inadvertently consolidate preexisting race/ethnicity constructions or reinforce a punitive approach to public safety rather than abolitionist or restorative models.
Me-Search concerns: scholarly self-location may invite critiques of objectivity; the author reflects on his own positionality and the inherent subjectivity of research on one’s own group.
Testimonio and epistemic legitimacy: uses testimonio as a biographical truth-telling method linked to Black feminist theory; aligns with narrative criminology to foreground marginalized voices.
The author argues that all research is “me-search” to some extent, because questions arise from one’s own positionality; diversity in academia strengthens scholarship by centering marginalized perspectives.

Centering Language and Politics: Latinx? Latina/o/x? Latin@?

The term Latinx is presented as an intellectual provocation to interrogate gender binaries and to acknowledge nonbinary gender identities.
Cautions that simply adding an x can risk gender-blind sexism if it does not accompany substantive action toward inclusion and structural change.
The author prefers not to over-rely on Latinx/Latino/a/x labels as a central organizing principle; argues for focusing on race and class as foundational analytic anchors while recognizing the value of inclusive language.
Critiques the use of “black and brown” as an umbrella that can obscure anti-Black racism and heteronormative violence; emphasizes attention to how gender, sexuality, and patriarchy intersect with race in the CJ system.
Acknowledges that the term Latinx has political and linguistic complexities and that linguistic choices should be paired with action, not mere rhetoric.
Final reflection: language matters as a tool for inclusion, but it should not mask deeper structural harms or replace critical analysis of power relations.

Conclusion

The mandate of Latino criminology is collective and evolving; it seeks to converge with critical criminology and Latino Studies while allowing for divergent, context-specific development.
Praxis-oriented aim: distinguish between academic study of crime and the functioning of actual criminal justice systems; improve measurement of racial/ethnic subjectivities in institutions.
Cautions that naming a field carries risks of reifying racial categories and that abolitionist or restorative frameworks should be considered alongside “justice” paradigms.
Calls for ongoing collaboration with Latino Studies and other disciplines to depart from settler-colonial and white supremacist inheritances and to reimagine CCJ in more emancipatory directions.

Acknowledgments

Originated from the Centering the Margins: Addressing the Implementation Gap of Critical Criminology conference (April 12–13, 2019 at Eastern Michigan University).
Gratitude expressed toward colleagues and reviewers for feedback; inspiration drawn from scholars who have advanced discussions on Black criminology and related fields.

Ethical, Philosophical, and Practical Implications

Ethical: advocates decolonizing CCJ knowledge production, centering marginalized communities, and challenging epistemic violence.
Philosophical: links liberal modernity with carceral state violence; questions liberalism’s promise vs. its practice in deploying exclusionary social control.
Practical: urges reforms in data collection, theory development, mentorship, and pedagogy to better reflect Latino experiences and to challenge white supremacist structures in CJ systems.

Key Concepts and Terms to Remember

Unfuck: to correct a situation in a timely way; used as a call to decolonize criminology.
Coloniality and colonialism: historic and ongoing processes shaping knowledge, power, and social control.
State crime and state-corporate crime: coercive actions by state and corporate entities that harm marginalized groups.
Internal colonialism: domination and exploitation within a single state across heterogeneous groups.
Neocolonialism: continuing forms of control through economic, political, and cultural means.
Ethnic/racial data accuracy: the need for precise, nuanced measurements of Latinos in CJ data.
Testimonio: a biographical, testimonial approach rooted in Black feminist thought used to legitimize marginalized voices in scholarship.
Latinx/Latino/a/x language politics: debates over inclusion, gender, and anti-Blackness in linguistic labeling.

Notable Data and References Mentioned

LatCrim network and Latinos in US criminology: LatCrim.org; Latinos represented in US higher education faculty is < 5%.
Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) data: as of 2014, 46.2% of police organizations had zero Black full-time sworn personnel; 48.2% had zero Hispanic/Latino full-time sworn personnel.
Key scholars and works cited across CCJ, Latino Studies, and Global South criminology include: Cunneen & Tauri (Indigenous criminology), Agozino (Counter colonial criminology), Maldonado-Torres (coloniality of being), Crenshaw (intersectionality), and numerous others listed in the references.

Connections to Broader Themes in Criminology and Ethnic Studies

Intersections of race, class, gender, and immigration status in shaping experiences of crime and policing.
Critical criminology’s evolution toward intersectional, transnational, and decolonial perspectives.
The role of ethnic studies and testimonio in enriching disciplinary debates and legitimizing marginalized voices.
The imperative to reframe criminal justice reform within a broader political economy that centers human rights, dignity, and restorative approaches rather than mere punitive expansion.