The juvenile justice system was created more than a century ago to assist, rather than punish, children like Jason. A product of the emerging twentieth-century concept of childhood as a period of innocence and malleability, the system was founded on the premise that delinquent acts by children were not born of malevolence, but rather were a product of antecedent forces largely beyond their control. The juvenile justice system was therefore to stand apart from the criminal justice system both substantively and procedurally. “The child was to be ‘treated’ and ‘rehabilitated,”‘ the Supreme Court would later reflect, “and the ‘procedures,’ from apprehension through institutionalization, were to be ‘clinical’ rather than punitive.” Criminal jurisprudence was eschewed in favor of procedural informality and nearly unfettered discretion, which, reformers believed, would best enable courts to diagnose and fashion an individualized cure for each child’s delinquent behavior.
Scholars discuss the most significant immigration-related cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, their ramifications, and what to expect in 2020.
Experts discuss legal developments and related ramifications one year after President Trump declared a national emergency at the U.S. Southern Border with Mexico in order to build a wall.
"It's important to note that scholars have long observed that political discourse and political events can contribute to the frequency of bias incidents. In fact, this phenomenon has a name today. It's called the Trump Effect."
Migrant children fleeing violence in their native countries have experienced severe psychological trauma before and after entering the country when we separated them from their families and placed them in detention facilities, and some families remain separated.