For several decades, drug use has shaped the criminal justice system. Drug and drug-related offenses are the most common crime in nearly every community. Drug offenders move through the criminal justice system in a predictable pattern: arrest, prosecution, conviction, incarceration, release. In a few days, weeks, or months, the same person may be picked up on a new charge and the process begins again.

The segment of society using drugs between 1950 and 1970 expanded with the crack cocaine epidemic of the mid-1980's, and the number of drug arrests skyrocketed. Early efforts to stem the tide only complicated the situation. Initial legislation redefined criminal codes and escalated penalties for drug possession and sales. These actions did little to curtail the illicit use of drugs and alcohol. As law enforcers redoubled their efforts, America's prisons were filled, compromising Federal and State correction systems' abilities to house violent and career felons. Some States scrambled to "build out" of the problem, spending hundreds of millions of dollars on new prisons, only to find that they could not afford to operate or maintain them.

Other jurisdictions, encouraged and supported by the Federal Government, developed Expedited Drug Case Management systems and were the first to adopt the term "drug court." These early efforts sped up drug case processing by reducing the time between arrest and conviction. Existing resources were used more efficiently, and serious drug trafficking cases were processed more rapidly. However, these efforts did little to address the problems of habitual drug use and simply sped up the revolving door from court to jails and prisons and back again.

As offenders flooded the criminal justice system, many were not identified as having problems with alcohol and other drugs or were released to the community without referral to treatment. When they were identified, attempts by judges to refer them to treatment often yielded meager gains, either because the few alcohol and other drug (AOD) abuse treatment programs were full and waiting lists were long or because cooperative working relationships between criminal justice agencies and AOD treatment providers were inadequate or nonexistent. In addition, the majority of drug abusers ordered by judges to participate in treatment did not remain involved in the process long enough to develop behaviors and skills for long-term abstinence.

The traditional adversarial system of justice, designed to resolve legal disputes, is ineffective at addressing AOD abuse. Moreover, many features of the court system actually contribute to AOD abuse instead of curbing it: Traditional defense counsel functions and court procedures often reinforce the offender's denial of an AOD problem. The offender may not be assessed for AOD use until months after arrest, if at all. Moreover, the criminal justice system is often an unwitting enabler of continuing drug use because few immediate consequences for continued AOD use are imposed. When referrals to treatment are made, they can occur months or years after the offense and there is little or no inducement to complete the program.

In response, a few forward-thinking and innovative jurisdictions began to reexamine the relationship between criminal justice processing and AOD treatment services. Several commonsense improvements sprang up spontaneously throughout the Nation. It became increasingly apparent that treatment providers and criminal justice practitioners shared common goals: stopping the illicit use and abuse of all addictive substances and curtailing related criminal activity. Each system possessed unique capabilities and resources that could complement the other and enhance the effectiveness of both if combined in partnership. Thus, the concept of treatment-oriented drug courts was born.

Drug courts were first implemented in the late 1980's, but they did not develop in a vacuum. They are an outgrowth of the continuing development of community-based team-oriented approaches that have their roots in innovative programs developed by pretrial, probation, and parole agencies, as well as treatment-based partnerships such as TASC (Treatment Alternative to Street Crime) and law enforcement innovations such as community policing programs.

Nor are drug courts the culmination or focal point of this evolution in community-based court programs. "Community courts," encouraged by the success of drug courts, have emerged over the past several years to include domestic violence courts, DUI (driving under the influence) courts, juvenile and family drug courts, neighborhood courts, and even "deadbeat dad" courts. These courts are designed to reflect community concerns and priorities, access community resources, include community organizations in policymaking decisions, and seek general community participation and support.

Drug courts and other new and innovative community-based court programs making up the community court field are, in turn, part of the "community justice" field. Along with community policing, community prosecution, and community corrections, these programs are evolving fast, gaining momentum, and spreading across the country. As the community justice field evolves into the 21st century, so too will drug courts.