Expert testifies Minnesota offender data show higher offender rates among Black Minnesotans, contests idea system creates racial disparities

David Zimmer, Public Safety Policy Fellow at the Center of the American Experiment, told the Minnesota Senate Judiciary Committee on Jan. 29 that a 2022 analysis of offender-by-race data shows Black Minnesotans commit serious crimes at a higher rate than white Minnesotans and that the criminal justice system does not create racial disparities in outcomes.

Zimmer said the new dataset from the Minnesota Department of Corrections allows researchers to use “an honest denominator” — the number of offenders by race rather than the general population — and that his analysis shows Black Minnesotans commit certain serious offenses at substantially higher per‑capita rates than white Minnesotans. “The data shows that Black Minnesotans commit serious crime defined as murder, assault, robbery, weapons, drug and [aggravated] assault at a rate 11 times higher than that of white Minnesotans,” Zimmer said.

Why it matters: The testimony addresses a central debate in Minnesota policy discussions about whether observed overrepresentation of Black people in prison reflects system‑created disparities or differences in offending rates and severity. Legislators said they wanted clarity on methods and data limits before drawing policy conclusions.

Zimmer described his report as four parts: rationale, methodology and limitations, findings and questions. He said the analysis focuses on serious crimes likely to lead to prison, compares Black and white adult offenders, and uses a ratio (Black-to‑white) throughout. He acknowledged limits: the report analyzes a single year (2022), relies largely on aggregate rather than longitudinal individual tracking, and cannot account for crimes that go unreported.

“An important point that I hope that you take away from my report lies in understanding the use of the terms disproportion and disparity,” Zimmer said. He distinguished a numeric disproportion from an unfair disparity and argued the large overrepresentation of Black Minnesotans in prison is explained by higher rates of serious offending rather than discriminatory treatment after arrest.

Zimmer presented multiple stage‑by‑stage comparisons. He told the committee his analysis found white serious offenders were arrested and charged at higher rates than their share of offending (arrest rate 1.5 times greater; charging rate 1.7 times greater), and that white serious offenders received felony sentences at higher rates (2.2 times greater for felony sentences in his aggregate analysis). For sentencing departures using sentencing‑guidelines data, he said white defendants were 1.19 times more likely to receive a mitigated dispositional departure (probation rather than prison) while Black defendants were 1.7 times more likely to receive a mitigated durational departure (shorter terms). For case‑specific defendants who received felony sentences, Zimmer reported Black defendants were 1.8 times more likely to receive a prison commitment and served sentences averaging 10.2 months longer; he attributed that gap primarily to three factors he measured: higher average offense severity, modestly higher criminal history scores, and higher weapon‑use frequency among Black serious felony defendants.

Senators pressed on methods and data limits. Senator Ladd asked how the analysis accounts for unreported crimes; Zimmer acknowledged the study uses reported crime data — “we can't get at the crimes that are not reported” — and noted that is a limitation of the available datasets. Several senators said other published, peer‑reviewed research reaches different conclusions and questioned how Zimmer’s findings differ; Zimmer said the offender‑by‑race dataset is newly available (reporting began in 2021) and that he has not seen other studies using that exact dataset.

Senator Lance and others raised the point that a substantial “unknown” race category in some records could affect ratios; Zimmer said for the serious crimes he analyzed the unknown category was not the majority and argued it did not drive his findings. Senator Croon and others said the report is valuable for analyzing how cases proceed after reporting even if it cannot measure unreported crime.

Zimmer said his work was peer reviewed internally at his organization and reviewed by economists and editors before publication. He concluded the system, in his view, generally applies consistent consequences and that addressing underlying drivers of offending in communities is necessary to reduce victimization.

Ending: Committee members asked follow‑up questions and did not take formal action on the presentation. Several senators said they would weigh the testimony alongside other research before pursuing policy changes.