Juvenile Law Commons^™

Youth Matters: Miller V. Alabama And The Future Of Juvenile Sentencing, John F. Stinneford

UF Law Faculty Publications

In the Supreme Court's latest Eighth Amendment decision, Miller v. Alabama, the Court held that statutes authorizing mandatory sentences of life in prison with no possibility of parole are unconstitutional as applied to offenders who were under eighteen when they committed their crimes. This short essay examines several themes presented in Miller, including the constitutional significance of youth and science, the legitimacy of mandatory life sentences and juvenile transfer statutes, and the conflict between “evolving standards of decency” and the Supreme Court’s “independent judgment.”

This essay also introduces important articles by Richard Frase, Carol Steiker and Jordan Steiker, …

Transforming Juvenile Justice: Making Doctrine Out Of Dicta In Graham V. Florida, Jason Zolle

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

In the late 1980s and 1990s, many state legislatures radically altered the way that their laws treated children accused of crimes. Responding to what was perceived of as an epidemic of juvenile violence, academics and policymakers began to think of child criminals as a "new breed" of incorrigible "superpredators." States responded by making it easier for prosecutors to try and sentence juveniles as adults, even making it mandatory in some circumstances. Yet in the past decade, the Supreme Court handed down four opinions that limit the states' ability to treat children as adults in the justice system. Roper v. Simmons …

When The Classroom Is Not In The Schoolhouse: Applying Tinker To Student Speech At Online Schools, Brett T. Macintyre

Seattle University Law Review

Despite the overwhelming increase in students’ Internet use and the growing popularity of online public schools, the United States Supreme Court has never addressed how, or if, schools can discipline students for disruptive online speech without violating the students’ First Amendment rights. What the Supreme Court has addressed is how school administrators can constitutionally discipline students within traditional schools. In a landmark decision, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, the Supreme Court announced the now famous principle that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” Still, the Court …

Equal Protection For Illegitimate Children In State Welfare Programs, Phillip North

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Illegitimate Children And Constitutional Review, Clayton W. Plotkin, John Vodonick

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Breed V. Jones: Double Jeopardy And The Juvenile , Jere Lamont Fox

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Special Populations: Mobilization For Change

Touro Law Review

This Article is based on a transcript of a break-out discussion which took place at An Obvious Truth: Creating an Action Blueprint for a Civil Right to Counsel in New York State, held at Touro Law Center, Central Islip, New York, in March 2008. The discussion was moderated by Karen L. Nicolson, Michael Williams, and Toby Golick.

This Article assesses the needs of various special populations and the possible strategies and solutions to create change through enacting a civil right to counsel. The Article is intended to capture information and viewpoints of the people who participated in the break-out discussion …

What Standard Should Be Used To Determine A Valid Juvenile Waiver?, Martin Levy, Stephen Skacevic

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Where For Art Thou Danforth: Bellotti V. Baird , David C. Boatwright

Pepperdine Law Review

The author's focus is upon a Supreme Court opinion dealing with the constitutional parameters of a minor's right to make an independent decision with respect to abortion. The majority, in an attempt to balance the often conflicting interests of the minor, the minor's parents, and the state, sets forth the minimum requirements with which parental consent statutes must comply. The author emphasizes the significance of the high court's plurality split regarding this issue, and cautions the practitioner as to the possibility of inconsistent rulings on such statutes in the future.

Procedural Rights In The Juvenile Court: Incorporation Or Due Process?, Glen W. Clark

Pepperdine Law Review

The landmark Supreme Court decision in In re Gault established, among other things, a juvenile's right to counsel in delinquency prosecutions. However, the decision left unanswered certain questions relating to the nature and scope of that right. In this article, the author examines whether or not Gault initiated a special due process right to counsel for juveniles apart from that body of sixth amendment law previously developed in criminal cases. Alternatively, he wonders whether Gault was meant to initiate a process of selective incorporation of the Bill of Rights into the juvenile justice system. The author critically analyzes the resulting …

The Utilization Of Intermediate Scrutiny In Establishing The Right To Education For Undocumented Alien Children: Plyler V. Doe, Diane I. Osifchok

Pepperdine Law Review

The recent decision in the case of Plyer v. Doe has seemingly solidified the use of the intermediate level of scrutiny as a legitimate standard of review. The Supreme Cour4 in its refusal to apply both the harsh level of strict scrutiny and the often inadequate lower level of a rational basis standard, sought a mid-level analysis. Thus, the intermediate level of review enabled the Court to hold the Texas statute which denied undocumented alien children a free public education constitutionally infirm.

Graham V. Florida: How The Supreme Court's Rationale Encourages Reform Of The Juvenile Justice System Through Alternative Dispute Resolution Strategies, Heather Hojnacki

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

The article presents information on the reforms in the juvenile justice system of the U.S. through alternative dispute resolution-based strategies which has been illustrated with the U.S. Supreme Court cases Roper v. Simmons, and Graham v. Florida. It discusses rationale of the U.S. Supreme Court in Graham case and analyzes Graham's current and future impact. A proportionality standard expressed in legislative enactments and state practice was applied by the U.S. Supreme Court in Graham case.

Thompson V. Oklahoma: Debating The Constitutionality Of Juvenile Executions, Susan M. Simmons

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Coy V. Iowa: A Constitutional Right Of Intimidation, John A. Mayers

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Avoiding Religious Apartheid: Affording Equal Treatment For Student-Initiated Religious Expression In Public Schools , John W. Whitehead

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Meaningless Opportunities: Graham V. Florida And The Reality Of De Facto Lwop Sentences, Mark T. Freeman

McGeorge Law Review

No abstract provided.

Miller V. Alabama And The (Past And) Future Of Juvenile Crime Regulation, Elizabeth S. Scott

Faculty Scholarship

This essay was the keynote address for a symposium on Miller v Alabama, the 2012 Supreme Court opinion holding unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment a statute imposing a mandatory sentence of life without parole for juveniles convicted of homicide. The essay argues that Miller embodies a way of thinking about juvenile crime that has taken hold in the early 21st century – an approach that emphasizes the importance for legal policy of developmental differences between juveniles and adults. This emerging trend contrasts sharply with the regulatory approach of the 1990s when moral panics over juvenile crime fueled punitive law reforms …

Hodgson V. Minnesota: Chipping Away At Roe V. Wade In The Aftermath Of Webster, Selina K. Hewitt

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deinstitutionalization Of Status Offenders: In Perspective , Robert W. Sweet Jr.

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Constitutional Right To Safe Foster Care - Time For The Supreme Court To Pay Its I.O.U., Daniel L. Skoler

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Allocating The Costs Of Parental Free Exercise: Striking A New Balance Between Sincere Religious Belief And A Child's Right To Medical Treatment , Paul A. Monopoli

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Disentangling Symmetries: Speech, Association, Parenthood, Laurence H. Tribe

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Legal Significance Of Adolescent Development On The Right To Counsel: Establishing The Constitutional Right To Counsel For Teens In Child Welfare Matters And Assuring A Meaningful Right To Counsel In Delinquency Matters, Michael J. Dale, Jennifer K. Pokempner, Riya Saha Shah, Mark F. Houldin, Robert G. Schwartz

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

"Indifferent [Towards] Indifference:" Post-Deshaney Accountability For Social Services Agencies When A Child Is Injured Or Killed Under Their Protective Watch, Carolina D. Watts

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Of Burning Houses And Roasting Pigs: Why Butler V. Michigan Remains A Key Free Speech Victory More Than A Half-Century Later, Clay Calvert

Federal Communications Law Journal

More than fifty years after the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its unanimous decision in Butler v. Michigan, the case remains a pivotal-if unheralded and perhaps underappreciated-victory for freedom of speech. This Article analyzes the Butler principle and demonstrates how courts repeatedly apply it across different media platforms and in a myriad of factually distinct contexts, ranging from prohibitions on the sale of sex toys to bans on beer bottles with offensive labels. The Article initially provides an in-depth look at Butler, drawing on literary scholarship, historical newspaper articles from the time of the case, and other sources. It then illustrates …

Mommy, Where Is Home: Imputing Parental Immigration Status And Residency For Undocumented Immigrant Children, 45 J. Marshall L. Rev. 991 (2012), Johanna K.P. Dennis

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Beyond Law Enforcement: Camreta V. Greene, Child Protection Investigations, And The Need To Reform The Fourth Amendment Special Needs Doctrine, Joshua Gupta-Kagan

Faculty Scholarship

The Fourth Amendment “special needs” doctrine distinguishes between searches and seizures that serve the “normal need for law enforcement” and those that serve some other special need, excusing non-law-enforcement searches and seizures from the warrant and probable cause requirements. The United States Supreme Court has never justified drawing this bright line exclusively around law enforcement searches and seizures but not around those that threaten important noncriminal constitutional rights.

Child protection investigations illustrate the problem: millions of times each year, state child protection authorities search families' homes and seize children for interviews about alleged maltreatment. Only a minority of these investigations …

The Solitary Confinement Of Juveniles In Adult Jails And Prisons: A Cruel And Unusual Punishment?, Anthony Giannetti

Buffalo Public Interest Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Front Matters - Vol. 11, No. 1, Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal

Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Child Online Privacy Protection Act: The Relationship Between Constitutional Rights And The Protection Of Children, Sasha Grandison

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

No abstract provided.