<p>Scholars have yet to adequately identify the county-level correlates of support for punitive criminal justice policy. Prior research has relied upon partisan politics, religious fundamentalist affiliation, and social threat perspectives to explain levels of punitiveness in many other U.S. jurisdictions. The current study applies these perspectives to assess the correlates of county-level support for crime policy in California. Data from multiple sources were employed to test which perspectives predicted voter support for eight ballot initiatives over a 30-year period. Results of fixed effects models suggest support for the partisan politics and economic threat perspectives, while other findings failed to support traditional fundamentalist and ethnic threat perspectives. Furthermore, property crime rates were associated with tough on crime voting, while the violent crime threat hypothesis was unsupported. Developing criminal justice policy that alters sanctions may draw varying levels of support across voters. Based on our findings, politicians should consider the partisanship, economic status, crime levels, and religious characteristics of their constituencies when advancing criminal justice policy.</p>