Election Day- we have to push for having our voices heard, now more than ever. Electoral politics hold a firm grip over the lives of American youth—particularly youth who are BIPOC. Beginning in preschool, students of color are disproportionately disciplined in comparison to their white classmates. Black students are disciplined three times more and Native American students are disciplined up to three times more, despite both identities making up significantly less of the school population (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2014). Increased disciplinary action has been correlated with higher interaction with the criminal justice system, as some actions taken by teachers and administrators directly puts students into contact with police officers and other agents of the justice system (U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights, 2014).
Disciplinary action that removes children from their school environment, such as those taken through law enforcement, juvenile courts, and out of school suspension, has also been correlated with higher dropout rates (Balfanz, 2003). In recent years, data collection has been extremely integral in understanding how students of color are disproportionately affected and fed into the criminal justice system. In 2009, the Department of Education began to have its Civil Rights Office start to collect data on school discipline and arrests. In the past four years, Secretary of Education Betsey DeVos has discouraged this research from continuing and halted recommendations from being implemented, which many fear will result in the furthering of disproportionate and discriminatory disciplinary actions and justice-related repercussions (Vox, 2020).
Attorney generals also have an impact on the outcome of juveniles who enter the justice system at a state-wide level. As the top legal agent in the state, the attorney general is in charge of providing legal opinions when needed, advising judges and lawmakers, handling criminal appeals, and can intervene in proceedings (USAGov). Attorney generals can make influencing laws relating to truancy, juvenile offenses, sentencing for juvenile offenders, and conditions under which juvenile offenders serve their sentences. They play a key role in how juveniles can enter the system and what happens to them once they have entered the system—which has a lifelong impact on our youth.
In the last 15 years alone, significant legal action in the field of juvenile justice includes prominent Supreme Court cases including Roper v. Simmons, Graham v. Florida, Miller v. Alabama, and Montgomery v. Louisiana. These cases discuss and set precedent on severity of punishment for youth:
· Roper (2005) established that it is unconstitutional to impose capital punishment on individuals who committed a crime when they were under 18
Graham
v.Florida
Read more about the Supreme Court Ruling here
· Graham (2010) established that juveniles could not receive life without parole for non-homicidal crimes they committed
· Miller (2012) held that juveniles cannot receive mandatory sentences of life without parole
· Montgomery (2016) held that juveniles cannot receive a mandatory sentence of life without parole (established in Miller), and that this ruling should be applied retroactively
These Supreme Court cases, although very recent, have made huge strides for the juvenile justice reform movement.
For the 2020-20201 Supreme Court term, one case regarding juvenile justice will be argued. Jones v. Mississippi will explore if the Eighth Amendment requires a sentencing authority to find that a juvenile is irreformable before they can decree a life sentence without the possibility of parole. This case will rely on the interpretation of the Eighth Amendment and whether or not Jones violates the standard set in the Constitution for cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court justices’ discipline contributes to how they will view a case after oral arguments and vote on the ruling, setting precedent for future cases. The two broad theories justices adopt are originalist and non-originalist—originalists interpret documents and sources based on the time they were adopted, whereas non-originalists take consequences, precedent, and natural law into consideration (University of Missouri: Kansas).
Juvenile justice at all levels—local, state-wide, and national—are impacted by elected individuals. The president has the power to appoint the secretary for the Department of Education, Supreme Court justices, and influence policy in the Department of Justice. Local elections can determine the state attorney general (they are either elected or appointed by the elected governor), and local judges can be elected or appointed by elected officials. Juvenile-In-Justice shares the stories of youth who have entered the justice system through the school-to-prison pipeline, who have been wrongfully kept in the system, who need resources and never received them, and who have not been advocated for by those in our government. In order to make change for our youth, the greatest power we have is through our vote.
This election has a great deal at stake for our youth, incarcerated or not, and we have the power to use our vote to speak up for those who aren’t able to speak for themselves. We must choose kindness, empathy, and justice for our youth. It is critical in a last push to come together as parents, law-makers, siblings, community members, and activists to be active through our election. Make sure you make your voice heard—make their voices heard—and vote. If you have voted or cannot vote, urge your friends, family, collogues, and peers to vote. Together, our voices can and will make a change and bring justice to our youth. Will you join us?