Juvenile Justice Reform

During my 12 years on the bench, a few of my law enforcement friends have asked me why I take — in their perspective — a “soft” approach with kids coming before me.
“Judge, you don’t see them on the streets when we deal with them,” they say.  “You see them in court with a smile and looking good.”
The question of my apparent naive approach to kids is valid — from their perspective of course.
For example, I recall this one kid four years ago. He was 15 years old and his name was Kenny. He personified the kids my friends described — angry, disrespectful, and defiant.
Imagine dealing with many Kennys every day. It is frustrating for police. I understand their criticism of my decisions. They serve on the front-end of the criminal justice system. They place their lives on the line every day.
Take for instance the kid who runs from a stolen car, the police give chase, and upon catching up, he resists and has to be wrestled to the ground. They both get scrapes and maybe torn clothes. Despite his admission to fleeing from and resisting the officer, the kid complains of police brutality.
I used to be one of those officers on the ground. I assure you, there is no failsafe method of cuffing a resisting person without getting scrapes, maybe some cuts, bruises and torn clothing. In fact, when you hit the ground, it’s a free-for-all and the training goes out the door. You do whatever it will take to get home that evening to your family — even if it means scraping, cutting, bruising and tearing clothes. There is a saying among peace officers: “I'd rather be tried by 12 of my peers than carried by 6 of my friends.”
[Click "Read More" to see the rest of Kenny's story ...]

The requirement that law enforcement must issue Miranda warnings to suspects in custody prior to interrogating them is well-understood and ingrained in our culture. The question of when a suspect is in custody, however, is less straightforward. 
On June 16, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of J.D.B. v. North Carolina, holding that law enforcement must consider a suspect’s age in the Miranda custody calculus. As was the reality in almost 20% of its cases this term, the court was split 5-4. The majority, led by Justice Sotomayor saw no reason to ignore the “commonsense reality” that children may feel bound to submit to police questioning when an adult would not. Justice Alito’s dissent was guided by the principle that law enforcement needs the clarity of a bright line rule.  
The majority and dissent did agree on one important point: juveniles are significantly more likely than adults to succumb to the intense pressure of custodial interrogations by making involuntary and false confessions. 
Indeed, Justice Sotomayor noted “the heightened risk of false confessions from youth,” while Justice Alito would “not dispute that many suspects who are under 18 will be more susceptible to police pressure than the average adult.” For a court that so rarely agrees on anything, the recognition that custodial interrogation can cause juveniles to confess at an increased rate should not be overlooked.
Custodial interrogation is a systematic, intense process designed to persuade the accused that it would be in their best interest to confess. The process can be so powerful that, even when the police use these tactics on innocent suspects, it may result in a confession. Studies demonstrate that false confessions play a role in anywhere from 15-25% of wrongful convictions. When parsing the date more closely, it is revealed that false confessions are almost twice as likely when the wrongfully convicted was a teenager or child. 

Nathan Bootz (shown at right), superintendent of Ithaca Public Schools in Michigan, has written a public letter to Governor Rick Snyder, requesting that his school be classified as a prison. 
Why? Check out his provocative letter (reprinted with his permission):

Dear Governor Snyder,
In these tough economic times, schools are hurting. And yes, everyone in Michigan is hurting right now financially, but why aren’t we protecting schools? Schools are the one place on Earth that people look to to “fix” what is wrong with society by educating our youth and preparing them to take on the issues that society has created.
One solution I believe we must do is take a look at our corrections system in Michigan. We rank nationally at the top in the number of people we incarcerate. We also spend the most money per prisoner annually than any other state in the union. Now, I like to be at the top of lists, but this is one ranking that I don’t believe Michigan wants to be on top of.
Consider the life of a Michigan prisoner. They get three square meals a day. Access to free health care. Internet. Cable television. Access to a library. A weight room. Computer lab. They can earn a degree. A roof over their heads. Clothing. Everything we just listed we DO NOT provide to our school children.
This is why I’m proposing to make my school a prison. The State of Michigan spends annually somewhere between $30,000 and $40,000 per prisoner, yet we are struggling to provide schools with $7,000 per student. I guess we need to treat our students like they are prisoners, with equal funding. Please give my students three meals a day. Please give my children access to free health care. Please provide my school district Internet access and computers. Please put books in my library. Please give my students a weight room so we can be big and strong. We provide all of these things to prisoners because they have constitutional rights. What about the rights of youth, our future?!
Please provide for my students in my school district the same way we provide for a prisoner. It’s the least we can do to prepare our students for the future...by giving our schools the resources necessary to keep our students OUT of prison.
Respectfully submitted,
Nathan Bootz
Superintendent
Ithaca Public Schools

 
What I hope Governor Snyder will take away from this is not the false idea that prisoners have a soft life, or that the resources that go to them should be taken away and given to school children; instead, I hope he is able to find ways to act on the principle that providing adequate investments in education and prevention go a long way toward preventing delinquency and crime. 
(Hat tip: sparkaction.org.)

Federal funding for juvenile justice has been critical in shaping juvenile justice policy and advancing juvenile justice reform in accord with the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act.
And anyone working in the field of juvenile justice knows that federal funds have been cut in the last few years. But it wasn't until I saw "Safeguarding the Future: Strategic Investments to Secure the Safety of America’s Youth, Families and Communities," a new 4-page publication from the Coalition for Juvenile Justice (CJJ), that I realized just how deeply federal assistance had been slashed:

Since FY 2002, federal investments in programs that prevent and reduce delinquency have decreased by 50%. Over that same period, federal spending on policing, prosecution and incarceration has increased by more than 60%.

Unsurprisingly, states are feeling the effects, particularly in a time when local resources are scarce to make up the difference. CJJ points out that it's critical to invest in programs that address and prevent delinquency, and that doing so pays off later on. In fact, CJJ puts a number on it:

The Senate passed by a 79-20 margin [on June 29] the Presidential Appointment Efficiency and Streamlining Act of 2011, which would remove the Senate confirmation requirement for hundreds of executive branch positions, including two of the top federal jobs related to child welfare and juvenile justice.
S. 679 was never referred out of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. The bill was introduced in late March by a bipartisan group of senators and blessed with the support of both Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
Chief among the youth-related positions affected by the bill are Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP), an agency within the Office of Justice Programs at the Department of Justice, and Commissioner of the Administration for Children, Youth and Families (ACYF), which is part of the Administration for Children and Families at the Department of Health and Human Services.

Beginning July 1, Georgia’s juvenile court judges will face a new, unprecedented set of challenges.  That’s the first day Georgia will no longer operate under an agreement that allows for the transfer of delinquent juveniles and runaways between the states.
Georgia is the only state in the nation that has not already adopted or is not set to adopt the Interstate Compact for Juveniles (ICJ), an update of a previous compact established in 1955.  Currently, Georgia functions under the 1955 compact.  The Interstate Commission for Juveniles, the governing body of the ICJ, gave Georgia three extensions to pass legislation so the state could enter the new compact (in 2008, 2009 and 2010).  Since the Legislature failed to enact the needed legislation in 2011, Georgia will not be given any more extensions, officials at the compact say.
The compact provides a framework that allows the seamless transition of juveniles from one state to another.  Without the compact, Georgia’s juvenile judges are left “scratching their heads,” Judge Mary Carden, a juvenile judge in the state, said.  “Nobody knows what’s going to happen.”

On June 9th, I got to watch as the members of the Center for Court Innovation’s Youth Justice Board – all high school students -- presented their final report, titled Looking Forward: Youth Perspectives on Reducing Juvenile Crime in Brownsville and Beyond, recommending strategies for reducing youth crime in Brownsville, Brooklyn, to an audience that included Brownsville community leaders and residents, juvenile justice system stakeholders, and friends and family.
The Youth Justice Board is an afterschool program that brings together high school-aged youth from across New York City interested in working on a policy issue that affects them and their peers.
 
Members of the Board work in two-year cycles, spending their first year building relationships with organizations and individuals working on similar topics while gathering information for their  recommendations. In the second year, these relationships can become true partnerships, allowing the Board to create and implement projects that, with the support of the partnering agency, will be that much more effective.
 
Last program cycle, for example, the Board studied the juvenile justice system in New York City. During the first year, one of the Board’s recommendations was that youth and their families needed more information about how the juvenile justice system works.

What's one of the biggest drivers pushing kids into the juvenile justice system these days? Schools.
Schools often suspend or expel youth who misbehave, ostensibly to maintain order. Unfortunately, an analysis of 30 years of data on middle school expulsions and suspensions issued last year by the Southern Poverty Law Center found that the sanctions were unfair and ineffective.
So what can be done? For one thing, schools can partner with juvenile courts to reduce the number of unnecessary referrals to juvenile court (follow the link for a great 2010 presentation for the Connecticut Juvenile Justice Alliance given by Judges Steven Teske and Brian Huff on how they accomplished this in their jurisdictions).
But restorative justice offers another useful solution. Recent research done on a few schools in the U.S., Britain, and Canada suggests that adopting restorative justice techniques in the classroom can reduce suspensions and expulsions significantly. 

Karen Pittman (left), President and CEO of the Forum for Youth Investment, has a saying about working with teens that's worth repeating: "Problem-free is not fully prepared."
How does that apply to teens in the alcohol and drug treatment, or kids in the juvenile justice system?
Focusing just on helping teens get sober or crime-free isn't enough. Like other teens, they have developmental needs they need to meet to be successful. They need support and opportunities to grow their social skills, emotional skills, navigational skills ... competencies that are key to growing up and becoming contributing adults. 
How do young people build those skills? They need to be connected with caring adults, in places where they can practice those skills with appropriate feedback.
The trouble is, as Ms. Pittman explained in a brief video interview (see below) that we did with her at the Reclaiming Futures Leadership Institute in May, most efforts to help kids succeed are focused primarily on educational and vocational skills. These are critical, but the trick is to find the caring adults and the places where teens can build and practice those "soft" skills. 
Check out what she has to say:

[Interested in what researchers have to say about mentoring young people who have had contact with the juvenile justice and foster care systems?
The Center for Interdisciplinary Mentoring Research at Portland State University (PSU) has invited, the author wrote me, "not one, not six, but 12 researchers to give back-to-back presentations in a "Ted Talks" format ... all on mentoring young people." That's what I call a mentoring lollapalooza! Read on for details. -Ed.]
 

The Portland State University (PSU) Center for Interdisciplinary Mentoring Research is proud to present the Summer Symposium on Mentoring Research. This special one-day symposium is for a national audience of professionals from youth mentoring programs or working in the fields of child welfare, juvenile justice, mental health, and education. Throughout the day, distinguished researchers will give short, substantive talks highlighting their most important and intriguing findings. It will be a fast-paced, stimulating presentation of thought-provoking topics and trends in youth mentoring. Attendees will have opportunities to discuss these themes and to network with colleagues.