Juvenile Law Commons^™

Symposium Foreword: Bombshell Or Baby Step? The Ramifications Of Miller V. Alabama For Sentencing Law And Juvenile Crime Policy, Paul J. Litton

Faculty Publications

This short essay, which serves as the Symposium Foreword, argues that the rationale of Miller is incoherent insofar as it permits juvenile LWOP sentences and that the Court misidentifies the foundational principle of Roper. First, in banning mandatory juvenile LWOP sentences, the Court invokes Woodson, which bans mandatory death sentences. The Court maintains that Woodson, from its capital jurisprudence, applies because juvenile LWOP is “akin to the death penalty” for juveniles. But if the Court’s capital jurisprudence is binding based on that equivalence, Roper should imply that juvenile LWOP, like the death penalty, is unconstitutional for juveniles. This essay briefly …

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, …

Where The Judiciary Prosecutes In Front Of Itself: Missouri's Unconstitutional Juvenile Court Structure, Josh Gupta-Kagan

Faculty Publications

This article is the first scholarly examination of Missouri’s unusual juvenile court structure: Missouri law charges a “juvenile officer” with exclusive authority to determine which child welfare or delinquency cases to file and what to charge in each case. The juvenile officer is hired and supervised by juvenile court judges, and the juvenile officer litigates cases in front of those same judges. This structure differs from the typical procedures in juvenile courts around the United States, which have generally adapted their juvenile courts to reflect the norm of executive branch agencies or attorneys (not court staff) filing cases to intervene …

Treating Juveniles Like Juveniles: Getting Rid Of Transfer And Expanded Adult Court Jurisdiction, Christopher Slobogin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

The number of juveniles transferred to adult court has skyrocketed in the past two decades and has only recently begun to level off. This symposium article argues that, because it wastes resources, damages juveniles, and decreases public safety, transfer should be abolished. It also argues that the diminished culpability rationale that has had much-deserved success at eliminating the juvenile death penalty and mandatory life without parole for juveniles is not likely to have a major impact on the much more prevalent practices of transferring mid- and older-adolescents to adult court and expanding adult court jurisdiction to adolescents; neither the law …

The Dangers Of Psychotropic Medication For Mentally Ill Children: Where Is The Child’S Voice In Consenting To Medication? An Empirical Study, Donald H. Stone

All Faculty Scholarship

When a child with a mental illness is being prescribed psychotropic medication. who decides whether the child should take the medication — the parent or the child? What if the child is sixteen years of age? What if the child is in foster care: Should the parent or social service agency decide? Prior to administering psychotropic medication, what specific information should be provided to the person authorized to consent on behalf of the child? Should children be permitted to refuse psychotropic medications? If so, at what age should a child he able to refuse such medication What procedures should be …

Inter-Country Adoption And The Special Rights Fallacy, James G. Dwyer

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

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 …

Testifying Minors: Pre-Trial Strategies To Reduce Anxiety In Child Witnesses, Dawn Hathaway Thoman

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Wanted: Forever Home – Achieving Permanent Outcomes For Nevada's Foster Children, Miriam C. Meyer-Thompson

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

It's Time To Start Showing A Little Restraint: In Search Of A Compromise On Federal Seclusion And Restraint Legislation, Cali Cope-Kasten

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

In 2009, the United States House of Representatives heard testimony that hundreds of students had been injured in schools by teachers secluding or physically restraining them. Congress had never legislated on seclusion and restraint, but the alarming allegations of student injuries and deaths prompted many parents to demand a ban on the use of the techniques in schools. In the continuing debate, school officials have protested that seclusion and restraint are important tools for teachers to protect their classrooms from out-of-control students. Torn between these two extreme positions, Congress has twice attempted — but failed — to pass federal legislation …

The Achievement Gap And Disparate Impact Discrimination In Washington Schools, Sarah Albertson

Seattle University Law Review

In today’s public schools, students designated as “white” and “Asian” consistently outperform students from other ethnic groups in test scores and graduation rates. These disparities, commonly called “the achievement gap,” are a symptom of greater issues, or “opportunity gaps.” Washington State has recently taken a further step to address the achievement gap and racial discrimination in schools. In 2010, the Washington legislature passed the Equal Education Opportunity Law (EEOL), HB 3026, in response to the recommendations in commissioned achievement gap studies. The EEOL authorizes the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) to enforce this law through regulations. This …

The Categorical Distinction Between Adolescents And Adults: The Supreme Court's Juvenile Punishment Cases—Constitutional Implications For Regulating Teenage Sexual Activity, Martin R. Gardner

Brigham Young University Journal of Public Law

I undertake in this article the task of exploring the impact of the punishment cases in resolving one particular controversial family law issue involving the possible existence of a juvenile’s constitutional right to engage in sexual conduct prohibited by the state and against the wishes of that juvenile’s parents. While the Supreme Court has seldom decided cases involving direct claims by children of constitutional rights disfavored by their parents, assertions by minors of constitutionally protected sexual liberty have become more prevalent of late in light of the Supreme Court’s recognition in Lawrence v. Texas of a constitutionally protected right, at …

Snapchat And Sexting: A Snapshot Of Baring Your Bare Essentials, Nicole A. Poltash

Law Student Publications

This comment explores sexting between minors and its inseparable link to Snapchat. Part II provides background information on the practice and prevalence of sexting. Part III explains the Snapchat application and its various uses. Part IV discusses the implications of sexting, legal and otherwise. Part V examines how Snapchat directly conflicts with current law.13 Lastly, Part VI proposes possible solutions.

A Barrier To Child Welfare Reform: The Supreme Court’S Flexible Approach To Federal Rule Of Civil Procedure 60(B)(5) And Granting Relief To States In Institutional Reform Litigation, Rachel Dunnington

Seattle University Law Review

In a recent decision, Horne v. Flores, the Court demanded a broader and more flexible application of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (Rule) 60(b)(5). In doing so, the Court opened the door for states to seek relief from court-enforced agreements like consent decrees. This decision undermines the use of institutional reform litigation as a means of fixing the child welfare system and thus deals a further blow to the nation’s most vulnerable citizens. This Note will discuss Horne’s impact on consent decrees stemming from institutional reform litigation in child welfare. Part II will explore the history of Rule 60 as …

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.

Void For Vagueness: State Statutes Proscribing Conduct Only For A Juvenile, Edward R. Roybal

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

In Re N, Juvenile Court Must Inform Minor Of His Right To Appeal , John H. Paulsen

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Dangerous Commitment , Jack Fleischli

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.