Skip to main content
Business LibreTexts

10.5: Juvenile Justice Process

  • Page ID
    43669
    • pexels-photo-923681.jpg
    • Contributed by Alison S. Burke, David Carter, Brian Fedorek, Tiffany Morey, Lore Rutz-Burri, & Shanell Sanchez
    • Professors (Criminology and Criminal Justice) at Southern Oregon University
    • Sourced from OpenOregon

    [1] Some states with very specific and real gang problems devised targeted gang suppression laws and legislation, while other states did not. The fear of youth crime led states to create mandatory minimum legislation (like Measure 11 laws in Oregon), waiver and transfer laws, and zero tolerance policies.

    [2] Due to the loose definitions of parens patrea and the court’s attempt to act in the best interest of the child, after World War II, the juvenile court was criticized for disregarding due process.

    Due process refers to the procedural rights established in the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights. It includes rights such as the right to legal counsel, right to call witnesses, and right to be notified of charges (which will be revisited in In re Gault). The original juvenile court did not implement due process rights because it was intervening in the lives of youth for their own good, not in such a formalized adult way where they would need constitutional protections. However, because of the abuse of power, this changed in later decades.


    1. Feld, B.C. (2003). The Politics of Race and Juvenile Justice: The ‘Due Process Revolution’ and the Conservative Reaction. Justice Quarterly 20:765-800.
    2. Rubin 1985