The third sociological question he intended to answer was how routine interactions are shaped and impacted by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) procedures and paperwork.
The researcher was interested in these questions because he intended to review how segregation occurs in prison settings. This is after the U.S Supreme court in 2005 ruled that the California’s Correctional Centers unwritten practice that consisted of segregating inmates on the basis of their race, in cells that were shared by two people in its reception centers, was to be put to strict scrutiny under the highest standard of constitutional review…(Johnson v. California 2005, 543 U.S. 499, at 506) (Goodman, 2008). After the ruling, the Supreme Court returned the case to the lower courts to reexamine it under the newly formed standard of review. Also, California was put into the task to reveal that its tacit practice was narrowly framed by the powerful interests of the government. CDCR later made a peaceful agreement with Johnson, as opposed to facing further legal dispute in the lower courts in regard to this issue. For this reason, many journalists, legislators, prison officials, academics, public, and researchers have developed interest in reviewing the CDCR practices and policies with respect to racial segregation. Therefore, the decision of the Supreme courts in Johnson v. California formed the motive behind the sociological questions in Goodman’s research (Goodman, 2008).
In this article, the literature review is summarized in a way that it shows some findings and positions of other authors concerning the issue. The significance of the research questions is built from the flow of these summaries. For example, the literature review is presented in the form of why studying racial segregation in California prisons is of importance. The first evidence given was from a review from California