By Eleanor Staples and Jo Staines

This research sought to provide evidence about care-experienced children’s involvement with YJSs from the perspectives of both professionals and children. It looks at how YJS professionals understand care-experienced children’s needs and challenges and what barriers exist to working with them. It also explores perceived success factors, roles and relationships with multi-agency partners, and the impact of policy instruments designed to reduce the numbers of care-experienced children entering the youth justice system.

Research & Analysis Bulletin 2024/03 Manchester, UK: HM Inspectorate of Probation, 2024. 52p.

By Elizabeth Cauffman

With support from NIJ and others, the University of California (UC), Irvine and the Superior Court of California, Orange County engaged in a collaborative effort to evaluate a Young Adult Court (YAC) that specifically handles justice-system-involved 18- to 25-year-old young men in Orange County, California. The study is a randomized controlled trial that follows young men in the YAC treatment group as well as similar young men who are processed in traditional court (“control”) for 30 months after their enrollment into the court (YAC treatment) or study (control). For this project, the research study team has interviewed the young men every 3 to 6 months for 30 months (baseline; 3-month follow-up, 6-month follow-up, 12-month follow-up, 18-month follow up, 24-month follow-up, and 30-month follow-up). Questions in the research interviews cover various domains, including criminal and antisocial behavior, perceptions of the legal system, psychological development, psychosocial maturity, social context (e.g., peer groups, family support), and environmental factors (e.g., neighborhood disorder). We also collect data from two additional sources for YAC treatment participants actively engaged in the court (i.e., pre-graduation). First, we conduct 10-minute interviews with YAC participants before or after their court hearings to assess their perceptions and experiences of the court as it unfolds. Second, case managers and the YAC probation officer submit reviews of each participant’s progress in the program. The primary goal of the study is to understand whether the YAC improves life outcomes for the young men by reducing recidivism, reducing antisocial behavior,  improving health, improving developmental and psychological outcomes, and/or promoting positive socio-economic and educational outcomes. When data collection is complete, another goal is to examine whether the YAC reduces racial, ethnic, and socio-economic disparities across the life-course– particularly after YAC graduation. In addition to designing and launching the brand new Orange County YAC, this NIJ-sponsored project also aimed to describe the perceived successes and challenges associated with involvement in another, pre-existing YAC: The San Francisco Young Adult Court (which was established in 2015; https://sf.courts.ca.gov/divisions/collaborative-courts/young-adult-court). For this component of the project, our goal was to use data from the San Francisco YAC to inform and improve the Orange County YAC. 

Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Program, 2024. 23p.

By Richard Mendel

Well designed alternative-to-incarceration programs, such as those highlighted in Effective Alternatives to Youth Incarceration: What Works With Youth Who Pose Serious Risks to Public Safety,1 are critically important for reducing overreliance on incarceration. But support for good programs is not the only or even the most important ingredient for minimizing youth incarceration. To reduce overreliance on youth incarceration, alternative-to-incarceration programs must be supported by youth justice systems that heed adolescent development research, make timely and evidence-informed decisions about how delinquency cases are handled, and institutionalize youth only as a last resort when they pose an immediate threat to public safety. In addition, systems must make concerted, determined efforts to re duce the long standing biases which have perpetuated the American youth justice system’s glaring racial and ethnic disparities in confinement. This report will highlight state and local laws, policies and practices that have maximized the effective use of alternative-to-incarceration programs and minimized the unnecessary incarceration of youth who can be safely supervised and supported at home.   

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2023. 25p.

By Ciera Phung-Marion | 99 Wash. L. Rev. 277 (2024)March 1, 2024

Abstract: In June 2022, the United States Supreme Court released the historic decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, holding that the U.S. Constitution does not protect an individual’s right to an abortion. Dobbs overturned many cases, including J.D. v. Azar, which previously protected abortion rights for unaccompanied migrant youth in federal detention facilities. Post-Dobbs, the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR)—the agency responsible for caring for detained immigrant children—still protects abortion rights as part of its own internal policy. Without judicial precedent, however, this policy lacks the stability to truly protect the rights of the children in its care. This Comment discusses the impact of Dobbs on the rights of unaccompanied immigrant children (UCs) detained in immigration custody by ORR. Now that detained UCs’ right to abortion is only protected by agency policy, it can be changed by ORR without going through notice and comment rulemaking. This Comment explains the historical context of the rights of migrant children and the right to an abortion. It advances the argument that states that want to protect abortion for detained immigrant youth must incorporate those rights in child welfare laws.

99 Wash. L. Rev. 277 (2024)March 1, 2024

By Michael Welner, Matthew DeLisi, Heather M. Knous-Westfall, Carolyn C. Meltzer & James D. Seward 

In 2012, the United States Supreme Court struck down existing legislative statutes mandating life without parole sentencing of convicted homicide offenders under age 18. The Court’s core rationale credited research on brain development that concludes that juveniles are biologically less capable of complex decision-making and impulse control, driven by external influences, and more likely to change. Closer scrutiny of the research cited in the defendants’ amicus brief; however, reveals it to be inherently flawed because it did not include relevant populations, such as violent offenders; utilized hypothetical scenarios or games to approximate decision-making; ignored research on recidivism risk; made untenable leaps in their interpretation of relevance to the study of homicide, and failed to include contradictory evidence, even from the brief’s authors. In forensic assessment, a blanket assumption of immaturity based on a homicide offender’s age is not appropriate, as research has demonstrated that in relevant respects, older adolescents can be just as mature as adults. An individualized and thorough assessment of each juvenile offender, including an analysis of personal history, behavioral evidence such as pre-, during, and post-crime behavior and testing data more accurately informs questions of immaturity and prognosis in juvenile violent offenders.

American Journal of Criminal Justice (2023) 48:1157–1182

By The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Key findings

• In 2023, female students and LGBTQ+ students experienced more violence, signs of poor mental health, and suicidal thoughts and behaviors than their male cisgender and heterosexual peers.

• From 2021 to 2023, there were early signs that adolescent mental health is getting better. There were also concerning increases in students' experiences of violence at school.

• From 2013 to 2023, 10-year trends were similar to what data showed in 2021. There were decreases in students' use of substances. There were increases in students' experiences of violence, signs of poor mental health, and suicidal thoughts and behaviors. Students' sexual activity decreased, but so did their protective sexual behaviors, like condom use.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2024.