LAUSR

The work of the juvenile justice system is marked by profound moral ambiguity and practical uncertainty, yet that work is also thoroughly bureaucratized. Rules and routines circumscribe the work’s ambiguity and uncertainty. So what does it mean to do justice under such conditions? Drawing on field notes from the observation of 33 different sentencing meetings in one state’s juvenile justice system, this article presents a grounded view of this problem, focusing on seemingly contradictory routine and creativity observed in the sentencing meetings. To explain this apparent contradiction, this article offers an original theoretical contribution, tying together a pragmatist theory of action, research from the practice theory tradition in organizational studies, as well as research on ritual, to develop an account of the ways in which structured actions allow people to navigate ambiguity and uncertainty. The article then examines one particularly difficult case that causes the organizational routine to break down. This breakdown forces the juvenile justice professionals to get creative with their bureaucratically available options. While they deviate from the typical organizational routine, they return to established ritual of the sentencing process. The article concludes with an initial attempt to develop a broader pragmatist account of ritual, focusing on the ways in which ritualized action make concrete our abstract and often contradictory ideals.