Juvenile Curfews and the Courts: Judicial Response to a Not-So-New Crime Control Strategy

1999 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Hemmens ◽  
Katherine Bennett
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Crime Control ◽  
Juvenile Crime ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Lower Court ◽  
Adult Court ◽  
Frequent Use ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Crime Wave

There is widespread sentiment that juvenile crime is out of control. Although this perception is incorrect, it has led to a number of changes in how juvenile offenders are dealt with, such as increased use of waiver to adult court and more frequent use of confinement as a sanction. This article examines the constitutionality of juvenile curfews, another currently popular response to the supposed juvenile crime wave. Because the Supreme Court has not provided guidance on this issue, the authors examine recent lower court decisions and discuss the legal implications of juvenile curfew laws.

The Persistent Problem of Media Taxation: First Amendment Protection in the 1990S

1997 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 579-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathy Packer ◽  
Karla K. Gower
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Lower Court ◽  
Persistent Problem ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Lower Courts ◽  
Explicit Recognition ◽  
One Step ◽  
The Media ◽  
Substantial Change

This article examines U.S. Supreme Court decisions regarding the constitutionality of taxation of the mass media. It concludes that the Court's 1991 decision in Leathers v. Medlock does not represent a substantial change in the law governing taxation of the media but is one step in the evolution of two distinct lines of media taxation cases. The article also examines how the lower courts have applied Leathers in the six years since it was decided. The lower court decisions uniformly - although not explicitly - recognize the two lines. What is needed now is explicit recognition by both the Supreme Court and the lower courts.

scholarly journals “We Can’t Just Throw Our Children Away”

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 613-645
Author(s):  
Anjelica Harris
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Supreme Court Justice ◽  
Life Without Parole ◽  
Life Sentence ◽  
Eighth Amendment ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law

In the words of Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, children are different. The issue of how to sentence juvenile offenders has long been controversial. Although psychology acknowledges the connection between incomplete juvenile brain development and increased criminality, the justice system lags behind in how it handles juvenile offenders. A prime example is the case of Bobby Bostic, who at the age of sixteen was charged with eighteen offenses and sentenced to 241 years in prison. This sentence, known as a term-of-years or virtual life sentence, essentially guarantees that no matter what Bobby does or who he proves himself to be as an adult, he will die in prison. Since Bobby’s sentencing in 1997, the Supreme Court has held that sentencing juveniles to death violates the Eighth Amendment and has banned life without parole for juvenile offenders. Despite landmark Supreme Court decisions, a gap in the law continues to exist when it comes to juvenile non-homicide of- fenders who are certified and tried as adults. Thousands of juvenile offenders are now trapped in the legal gap that exists in the distinction, or lack thereof, between life without parole and lengthy term-of-years sentences. This Comment will explore the gap in the law, the various ways the States have chosen to handle this issue, and will propose a possible solution for Texas.

Civil Jurisdiction, Settler Politics, and the Colonial Constitution, circa 1840-58

2008 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Damen Ward
Keyword(s):  
Lower Court ◽  
Parliamentary Debates ◽  
Early Colonial ◽  
Responsible Government ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Competing Ideas ◽  
Politics And Law ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Institutional Relationships

In early colonial politics, decisions about lower court jurisdiction often reflected competing ideas about the relationship between different parts and functions of government. In particular, court structure and jurisdiction could be seen as having important implications for the role and power of the governor. Appreciating the importance of jurisdiction as a way of defining, and arguing about, the distribution and exercise of political and legal authority in the colonial constitution allows connections to be drawn between different elements of settler politics in the 1840s and 1850s. The closing of the Court of Requests by Governor Grey in 1848, and the decisions of the Supreme Court judges in subsequent litigation, provide examples of this. Debate over the role of the governor in emerging systems of representative and responsible government after 1852 contributed to lower court jurisdiction remaining politically significant, particularly in relation to Māori.  This is shown by considering parliamentary debates about the Stafford ministry's 1858 proposals for resident magistrates' jurisdiction over "native districts". The politics of jurisdiction were part of wider contests about the establishment and consolidation of particular political and institutional relationships within the colonial constitution. This multi-faceted construction of government authority suggests a need to reconsider elements of Pākehā colonial politics and law.

Assessing Attitudes Toward Juveniles and Adults Adjudicated for Sexual Offenses in Canada: Does Offender Age Matter?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandon Sparks
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Adolescent Development ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Juvenile Crime ◽  
Young Offenders ◽  
Moral Outrage ◽  
Sexual Offenses ◽  
The Past ◽  
Effect Of Age

Over the past several decades, societal responses to juvenile crime has evolved from harsh sentences (including death) to more lenient punishments in congruence with our greater understanding of adolescent development. However, some groups of young offenders, such as those convicted of sexual offenses, appear to have fallen victim to a more punitive zeitgeist, where the mitigating effect of age may be diminished. In a 3 x (2) design, participants were randomly assigned to one of three vignette conditions and completed several measures regarding both juveniles and adults adjudicated for sexual offenses, including attitudes, moral outrage, and recommendations for sentence length and registration. Results indicated that adjudicated juveniles are viewed more favourably than their adult counterparts, although both received relatively long sentences. Further, over 90% of participants endorsed some form of registration for juvenile offenders. Implications for offender reintegration and public policy are discussed below.

scholarly journals U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Presidential Proclamation Restricting Entry of Individuals from Covered Countries

2018 ◽  
Vol 112 (4) ◽  
pp. 741-745 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Establishment Clause ◽  
Lower Court ◽  
Security Interest ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
Travel Restrictions ◽  
Preliminary Injunction

On June 26, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld President Trump's most recent iteration of restrictions on entry to the United States by nationals from certain foreign countries. Following several rewrites of this travel ban, ensuing legal challenges, and lower court injunctions, the Court, in a five-to-four decision authored by Chief Justice Roberts, reversed the latest ruling of a lower court that had granted a partial preliminary injunction against the ban. Although acknowledging that there was considerable evidence tying the travel ban to bias against Muslims, the Supreme Court found that the plaintiffs were nonetheless unlikely to succeed either in their statutory claim that Trump lacked the authority to impose this ban or in their constitutional claim that the ban violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Court accordingly reversed the lower court's injunction and remanded the case for further proceedings. The ruling, based on the Trump administration's asserted national security interest, leaves in place travel restrictions imposed on nationals of seven countries—Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen—only two of which are not Muslim-majority countries.

The essence of deprivation of the right to engage in certain activities as a punishment for an offense under Art. 264 of the Criminal Code

2019 ◽  
pp. 23-29
Author(s):  
Ольга Александровна Беларева
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The Road ◽  
Paradoxical Situation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Principle Of Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

В статье рассматривается сущность лишения права заниматься определенной деятельностью как обязательного дополнительного наказания за преступление, предусмотренное ст. 264 УК РФ. В большинстве приговоров по ст. 264 УК РФ дополнительное наказание сформулировано как лишение права заниматься деятельностью, связанной с управлением транспортным средством. Однако использование в приговорах единой формулировки не снимает вопросов, связанных с толкованием объема назначенных судом ограничений. Автором выделены два подхода к определению содержания понятия «транспортные средства»: широкий, включающий все виды транспортных средств, и узкий, включающий только механические транспортные средства. Анализ судебных решений позволяет сделать вывод об отсутствии единообразного подхода к определению содержания наказания в виде лишения права заниматься деятельностью, связанной с управлением транспортными средствами. Показано, что в практике применения наказания за преступления, предусмотренные ст. 264 УК РФ, сложилась парадоксальная ситуация: лицо, нарушившее правила дорожного движения, лишается права управления всеми видами транспортных средств. По мнению автора, такая ситуация нарушает принцип справедливости: характер наказания не соответствует характеру совершенного преступления. В целях единообразного применения уголовного закона Пленуму Верховного суда РФ следует разъяснить, что суды должны конкретизировать вид транспортных средств, права управления которыми лишается осужденный, исходя из характера совершенного преступления. The article deals with the essence of deprivation of the right to engage in certain activities as a mandatory additional punishment for a crime under Art. 264 of the Criminal Code. In most of the sentences under Art. 264 of the criminal code additional punishment is formulated as deprivation of the right to engage in activities related to driving. However, the use of a single wording in sentences does not remove questions of interpretation of the scope of the court's limitations. The author identifies two approaches to the definition of the concept of “vehicles”: wide, including all types of vehicles, and narrow, including only mechanical vehicles. Analysis of court decisions leads to the conclusion that there is no uniform approach to determining the content of the penalty in the form of deprivation of the right to engage in activities related to the management of vehicles. The article shows that in the practice of punishment for the crimes provided for in the Art. 264 the criminal code, there is a paradoxical situation: a person who violates the rules of the road, is deprived of the right to control all types of vehicles. According to the author, this situation violates the principle of justice: the nature of the punishment does not correspond to the nature of the crime committed. For the purpose of uniform application of the criminal law to the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation it is necessary to explain that courts have to specify a type of vehicles which right of management is deprived condemned, proceeding from character of the committed crime.

22. A Revolution by Due Process of Law?

2021 ◽  
pp. 613-648
Author(s):  
Ian Loveland
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Final Part ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
High Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Due Process Of Law

This chapter analyses the conduct and constitutional implications of the United Kingdom’s proposed withdrawal from the European Union. The chapter begins by examining the legal basis, conduct, and result of the withdrawal referendum. The chapter then assesses the High Court and Supreme Court decisions in the first of the two Miller judgments. It continues with a discussion on the extreme positions of ‘hard brexit’ and ‘soft brexit’ and the assesses the significance of the results of the unexpected 2017 general election. The chapter goes on to examine the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and the subsequent fall of the May government and its replacement by an administration led by Boris Johnson. In the final part of the chapter the Miller (No 2) and Cherry litigation and its political aftermath are discussed in full, with a particular focus laid on the controversial way in which the Supreme Court deployed the notion of ‘justiciability’ in its judgment in Miller (No 2).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document