Juvenile Justice Information Exchange (https://jjie.org/tag/juvenile-court/)
Since 2020 juveniles were defended by court-appointed lawyers who lacked state-mandated qualifications. How will juveniles get the qualified legal defense they deserve?
In 1998, the U.S. Supreme Court banned from courtroom evidence most results from lie-detector tests because those polygraph exams are scientifically flawed and unreliable, a ruling the American Psychological Association concurred with. However, in juvenile courts, where judges still have the discretion to allow or ban such so-called evidence, polygraphs have been used to coerce some juvenile sex offenders into making what researchers concluded were false confessions. The misuse doesn’t end there.
After decades of neglect, the youth justice field is awakening to the importance of diversion in lieu of arrest and formal court processing for many or most youth accused of delinquent behavior.
The juvenile court system is supposed to ensure that young people accused of crimes have legal representation, even if their families can’t afford a lawyer. But in Cuyahoga County, some courtrooms resemble hiring halls for favored attorneys who get hundreds of assignments yearly, while others get none.
Lawmakers in the Georgia House voted Monday to raise the age limit to 17 for prosecuting young defendants in juvenile court. House Bill 462 was approved on a vote of 145-22, sending it to the state Senate for further debate.
Most youth involved in the juvenile justice system between 2010 and 2019 in Harris County, Texas -- the nation's third-largest county -- a small fraction of youth with repeated run-ins with law enforcement accounted for the bulk of those who were in pre-trial detention, prosecuted, on probation or in post-conviction incarceration or some other restrictive placement, according to a recent Texas Policy Lab analysis.
Unless accused of criminally negligent homicide, no child younger than 12 could be legally arrested, detained or brought before a judge, according to legislation New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo appears poised to sign. Approved by the state’s legislature, the bill undoes a 1909 law allowing the arrests of kids as young as 7.
“Move the bodies.” That’s what a defense lawyer recently overheard an employee in juvenile court say, as if the young people being brought into the courtroom for the next hearing were animals to be herded. The dehumanizing of young people involved in the criminal legal system is common, unfortunately. Those comments, and the attitudes underlying them, can have detrimental effects on youth who hear themselves spoken about with bias, disapproval and disrespect.
Supporters of the juvenile justice status quo wrongly claim that community-based organizations are not yet strong enough to serve all youth who may otherwise cycle through juvenile courts, detention centers and on and off parole rosters. Ideally, opponents to reform say, youth would be served by nonprofits close to home, but that cannot happen until enough suitable nonprofits are available. This line of thinking ignores the community-based direct services already offered in many areas, from life coaching in Oakland to legal support in Los Angeles. Failing to adequately support these existing community services keeps us stuck in a cycle of waiting. Instead of waiting for community-based organizations to grow above and beyond their present capacities, how about we actually do the work required for their growth?
Juvenile court proceedings are closed to the public for good reason. As a matter of policy, we want to safeguard the privacy of young people charged with delinquent offenses. By making proceedings confidential and sealing juvenile court records, we enable young people