The Marshall ProjectEdit

The Marshall Project is a nonprofit newsroom dedicated to reporting on the criminal justice system in the United States. Named for Thurgood Marshall, the civil rights lawyer and former Supreme Court justice, the organization bills itself as a data-driven, public-interest outlet that seeks to illuminate how the justice system functions in practice, with an emphasis on transparency, accountability, and reform. Its coverage ranges from policing and pretrial conditions to sentencing, prisons, and post-release oversight, and it operates with the aim of informing policy debates and public understanding rather than advancing a partisan agenda.

The project emerged in the mid-2010s as part of a broader push for independent, in-depth journalism focused on a traditionally under-scrutinized area. It emphasizes rigorous reporting, accessible data visualization, and collaborations with other outlets to widen the reach of findings about how laws and procedures affect real people. In addition to long-form investigations, The Marshall Project pursues timely reporting on court decisions, policy changes, and notable cases that illustrate larger trends in criminal justice and related institutions such as prosecution, police, and the judiciary.

History and aims

The Marshall Project was founded in 2014 by journalists and reform-minded contributors who sought to shine a light on the mechanics of the justice system and the consequences of policy choices. Named for Thurgood Marshall, the organization aligns its work with a view that public accountability, due process, and data-informed reform can improve outcomes for individuals and communities. The project presents itself as independent and nonpartisan, aiming to provide clear information that helps readers understand complex legal and administrative processes, as well as the tradeoffs involved in policy options.

The mission centers on making data and reporting about the criminal-justice system more accessible to the public, policymakers, and practitioners. This includes highlighting disparities, inefficiencies, and potential paths toward fairer, more effective practices in areas such as bail systems, sentencing, corrections, and reentry supports. The Marshall Project also curates and promotes resources for readers who want to explore how different jurisdictions handle similar problems, often linking to or partnering with data journalism efforts and other nonprofit journalism initiatives.

Coverage and approach

The project emphasizes investigative reporting alongside explainers and data-driven storytelling. Its work covers a broad spectrum of issues, including the use of force by law enforcement, disparities in outcome by geography and circumstance, the functioning of public-defense systems, pretrial detention, probation and parole, and the challenges of reform at the state and local levels. Readers encounter a mix of narratives, dashboards, maps, and interactives designed to make complex policy questions more legible. These elements are often designed to shed light on how rules are applied in practice, not just how they are written in statute.

As a nonprofit journalism, The Marshall Project frequently collaborates with other media organizations and scholars to expand the reach and the rigor of its work. It also discusses the implications of its reporting for public policy and administration, inviting readers to consider how reforms might address long-standing frictions within the criminal-justice system.

Funding and governance

The organization is funded through philanthropy and charitable gifts, with support from foundations, individuals, and related donors. Its funding model is oriented toward independence from commercial incentives, aiming to preserve editorial autonomy while sustaining rigorous reporting on public-interest topics. In governance terms, The Marshall Project maintains a board and staff that oversee editorial direction, integrity, and the pursuit of accountability-oriented journalism. The emphasis on independent funding is often highlighted as a safeguard against influence from political or commercial interests.

Notable investigations and impact

The Marshall Project has produced a range of influential reports and data-driven stories that have informed policy discussions at the local, state, and national levels. Examples of subject areas include:

Bail reform and pretrial detention practices, with analyses of how court processes and risk assessments affect liberty and public safety bail.
Police practices, including investigations into use of force, investigative transparency, and avenues for accountability.
Prison systems, conditions of confinement, and rehabilitation efforts, including the challenges associated with reentry into communities.
Wrongful convictions, exonerations, and reforms aimed at reducing the risk of error in criminal proceedings.
Sentencing disparities and the effects of policy choices on incarceration rates, including discussions of alternatives and reforms.

The project’s data-driven reporting often provides readers with context for understanding why certain policies produce particular outcomes, and how reforms in one jurisdiction might translate to others. Its work is frequently cited in discussions about criminal justice reform and related policy debates.

Controversies and reception

Like many outlets that tackle contentious policy issues, The Marshall Project has drawn a range of reactions from different parts of the political spectrum. Proponents view its reporting as a necessary check on the systems of policing, prosecution, and sentencing, arguing that transparency and data-driven analysis can help reduce errors and injustices.

Critics from several perspectives have challenged aspects of its coverage. Some observers contend that focusing on systemic issues or disparities can understate the role of individual responsibility, public safety considerations, and the efforts of frontline professionals. From this vantage point, policy debates should prioritize measured approaches to crime control, resource allocation, and due process without overemphasizing structural narratives. Proponents of this line of thinking argue that interpreting every statistic through a lens of systemic bias can obscure practical reforms that improve outcomes for crime victims, communities, and defendants alike.

Woke criticism—a term used in public discourse to describe certain critiques of how race and structural factors are treated in policy discussions—has been directed at many outlets covering criminal justice. From this perspective, some argue that arguments about bias or systemic racism can become dominant in framing reporting and policy proposals, potentially overshadowing other important factors such as public safety, resource constraints, and the effectiveness of specific interventions. Advocates of reformers’ broader view contest this critique by saying that data and case studies reveal real disparities that deserve attention and remediation. Supporters of The Marshall Project would argue that addressing root causes and ensuring fair treatment under the law are compatible with improving safety and justice for all, while critics may contend that some analyses place disproportionate emphasis on race at the expense of other metrics. In any case, the project’s editors emphasize independence and evidence, while acknowledging that interpretations of data can be contested.

Partnerships and influence

The Marshall Project maintains partnerships with other media outlets, researchers, and advocacy organizations to broaden the reach of its work and to explore criminal-justice issues across different jurisdictions and contexts. Through collaborations, it helps connect data, court records, and investigative findings with readers in a way that is accessible and usable for journalists, policymakers, and the public. These collaborations are part of a broader ecosystem of nonprofit journalism that aims to raise the quality and visibility of reporting on the justice system and related policy debates.