Skip to main content
PRINT EDITION

Beyond “Children Are Different”: The Revolution in Juvenile Intake and Sentencing

Abstract: For more than 120 years, juvenile justice law has not substantively defined the core questions in most delinquency cases—when should the state prosecute children rather than divert them from the court system (the intake decision), and what should the state do with children once they are convicted (the sentencing decision)? Instead, the law has granted certain legal actors wide discretion over these decisions, namely prosecutors at intake and judges at sentencing. This Article identifies and analyzes an essential reform trend changing that reality: legislation, enacted in at least eight states in the 2010s, to limit when children can be prosecuted rather than diverted, and when and for how long they may be incarcerated or kept on probation based on the specific offense alleged or adjudicated.

These reforms are a sharp turn for juvenile law. Contrary to the field’s long emphasis on discretionary decisions not legally tethered to specific offenses, the reforms depend on the charges alleged or proven against a child, and limit judges’ authority at disposition and prosecutors’ at intake.

This Article fills a gap in the academic literature, which has previously focused on recent reforms to criminal, not juvenile, court sentencing of children. Recent juvenile court reforms prevent prosecutors and judges from using wide discretion to incarcerate children for petty offenses, follow social science research demonstrating how overly punitive actions undermine rehabilitative goals, and provide important checks and balances on what are often the most important decisions in individual cases. These juvenile court reforms also enhance the importance of plea bargaining, and thus risk creating the same harms as have been documented with plea bargaining in the criminal justice system. This Article argues that risk is mitigated by limitations on prosecutors’ leverage and that future reforms should include further checks on that leverage.

Download the Full Article

Other Articles from WLR Print Edition

June 1, 2025 in PRINT EDITION

Under the Umbrella of Water Law: Why Rainwater Harvesting Should Constitute a Valid Water Right Authors

Abstract: Rain is a major source of water. It provides for our greatest needs, such as feeding our gardens, crops, rivers, and lakes. As global climate change continues to unfold,…
Read More
June 1, 2025 in PRINT EDITION

Why Medicaid Is Addressing Homelessness with Section 1115 Waivers: A Critical Examination of the United States’ Federalist Mental Health System

Abstract: Housing and health care are deeply interconnected, and their systemic relationship profoundly affects individual and societal well-being. Inadequate funding has undermined the American mental health system for decades, leading…
Read More
June 1, 2025 in PRINT EDITION

A Right to Repress: IPEC v Inslee and the Parental Right to Determine the Gender of a Child

Abstract: Do parents have a constitutional right to determine their child’s gender? No court has held that they do, but that assumption was the basis of a challenge brought in…
Read More