By Angela M. Collins and Maisha Cooper

This paper discusses how juvenile waiver policies may be leading to a reduction in the rehabilitative nature of the juvenile justice system. The first section discusses the value of the juvenile justice system. Here, the beginning of the juvenile justice system and why the juvenile justice system is important will be summarized. The second section explains the movement that is being made toward a more punitive approach in regard to juvenile delinquents and how this could lead to the erosion of the juvenile justice system. Next is a discussion of how waivers play a part in the erosion and how their continued use could prove very dangerous for the juvenile justice system. The next section will look at the implications of the erosion and what could potentially happen if we lost the juvenile system. Last, there will be a glance at possibilities for the future, along with suggestions on how to improve the use of waivers. Overall, this paper will show that the use of juvenile waivers may be leading the United States away from a rehabilitative system for juveniles to a smaller version of an adult criminal court. 

• July 2024

• Social Sciences 13(7):367

 By Sarah Anderson, Lisel Petis and Jillian Snider

Over the past few decades, juvenile crime (i.e., “delinquency”), arrests and confinement have begun to decline—a trend that directly correlates with states and localities moving away from overly punitive, “tough on crime” juvenile policies and toward diversion initiatives aimed at limiting juvenile interaction with the justice system. Between 1996 and 2019, juvenile arrests declined by 74 percent, and between 1995 and 2019, juvenile incarceration dropped by 70 percent with no corresponding uptick in overall or violent juvenile crime.

Research on crime, adolescent brain development and behavior has demonstrated that arrest, detention and juvenile court adjudication and incarceration tend to increase delinquent youths’ risk of recidivism, negatively impacting psychosocial development and maturation into healthy, productive adulthood. In response, many communities are using diversion for low-risk juvenile offenders in place of formally processing youth through the juvenile court system. This allows juveniles to avoid the trauma and stigma of juvenile proceedings; avoid the burden of delinquency records that impede future educational and employment opportunities; and benefit from rehabilitation and accountability.

Of the many juvenile diversion models in use, pre-arrest diversion led by law enforcement—often referred to as deflection—has received comparatively little attention. This study works to fill that gap by assessing juvenile arrest rates and deflection efforts for all 50 states and providing a state-by-state overview and comparison of deflection programs

R Street Policy Study No. 263

Washington, DC: R Street, 2022. 23p.

By Marc Hyden and Steven Greenhut 

During periods of surging crime or intense public concern about crime, politicians ramp up their tough-on-crime rhetoric—often focusing their ire on young offenders whom they depict as receiving unreasonably light sentences. Crime-related fears are understandable, but America is at risk of embracing policies—especially regarding juveniles—that may only worsen the problem.

Since the 1990s, the nation has shifted from an incarceration-heavy approach toward juvenile offenders to one that tries to keep them out of the criminal justice system and provide counseling, training and rehabilitation services instead. These innovative programs are yielding positive results in terms of public safety and fiscal policy.

There are two main types of programs: diversion and deflection. Diversion is generally considered to be a formalized effort to divert someone who is already in the criminal justice system. Deflection is a police-led type of pre-arrest diversion. For the purposes of this paper, it includes civil citations; formal pre-arrest diversion to case management or restorative justice; and co-responder or community programs that apply to juveniles. The terms are sometimes used interchangeably, but the goal of each approach is to find service-based alternatives to the traditional justice system.

A recent R Street Institute study surveyed these varying programs nationwide, which now are rightly a standard part of the criminal justice system. Given their documented success, rather than abandoning these programs amid currently heightened crime fears, policymakers should expand them. In this paper, we outline a path forward by exploring the value of deflection programs; reviewing the public safety and fiscal benefits they offer; and highlighting a case from one jurisdiction that underscores the benefits of the approach.

Washington, DC: R Street, 2022. 7p.

By Sarah Hockenberry; Charles Puzzanchera

Data submitted to the National Juvenile Court Data Archive project (Archive) provide unique insight into the impact of COVID-19 on juvenile court caseloads. The Archive collects juvenile court data from around the nation to create national estimates detailing demographic and case processing characteristics of delinquency and petitioned status offense cases handled in U.S. juvenile courts. The uniqueness of the data collected by the Archive allows for a monthly analysis of court case volume and processing, which provides insight into any changes in case processing characteristics both at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and over time. This bulletin focuses primarily on patterns in case processing activities which occurred in 2020, compared with an average of the case processing characteristics for the prior 3 years (2017-2019), but also displays data through 2021.

  Pittsburgh, PA: National Center for Juvenile Justice. 2024. 8p.  

By Richard A. Mendel

   After decades of neglect, the youth justice field is awakening to the importance of diversion in lieu of arrest and formal court processing for many or most youth accused of delinquent behavior. Even amid rising concerns over youth crime nationwide, jurisdictions across the country are heeding the evidence by taking concerted action to address more cases of alleged lawbreaking behavior outside the formal justice system. This momentum to make diversion a centerpiece of juvenile justice reform is encouraging given powerful research showing that youth who are diverted from the justice system are far less likely to be arrested for subsequent offenses and far more likely to succeed in education and employment than comparable youth who are arrested and prosecuted in juvenile court. Greater use of diversion is also essential to reduce the persistent racial and ethnic disparities that pervade youth justice systems. This brief details significant diversion reform efforts of several types.   

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2024. 22p.

By Richard A. Mendel

This brief provides recommendations for advocates on how best to understand and address the messaging challenge in order to build support for further progress expanding the use of diversion in youth justice. The recent momentum to expand the use of diversion in youth justice is long overdue. However, to reach its potential, advocates must deliver clear, consistent messages to inform the public and persuade public officials. This will require advocates to: ● Develop a clear and simple definition of diversion that makes effective community-based alternatives to the formal justice system understandable and appealing to policymakers and the public. (See Text Box on p.2 for a definition and sample elevator pitch to promote diversion.) ● Craft messages to promote youth diversion that are grounded in evidence of diversion’s benefits and are compelling to persuadable voters as well as elected officials and other policymakers. ● Tailor messages to the political sensibilities and civic culture of the local community, and target messages to specific audiences. ● Develop effective strategies to combat sensationalized, alarmist, poorly contextualized news coverage and political rhetoric that stoke public fears of youth crime and subvert constructive reform efforts. ● Augment arguments and evidence with real-world stories illustrating the benefits of diversion and the harms of formal court processing. Involve youth, families, and community members with direct experience in the youth justice system to tell their stories and highlight the importance of diversion in human terms.

Issue Brief #4

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2024. 7p.

By Richard A. Mendel

Robust data collection and analysis are essential tools in any effort to expand and improve the use of diversion. Without accurate and timely demographic data, advocates cannot highlight disparities in the use of diversion and push effectively for reforms. Without information on which youth are succeeding in diversion, system leaders cannot revise and improve practices to improve outcomes. Lasting progress in diversion from system involvement for youth requires state and local justice systems to set meaningful goals and carefully monitor results. If they are to understand and address disparities, states and localities must collect and analyze data, broken down by race and ethnicity, at every stage of the process. To hone their strategies and document diversion’s benefits as compared to formal justice system involvement, they also must track results – not merely recidivism, but also other outcomes related to youth well-being and success and victim satisfaction with the justice process. Ideally, justice systems should bring together stakeholder teams to review the available data, identify opportunities for expanded use of diversion, uncover decision points where disparities are occurring and their underlying causes, and then brainstorm and implement solutions to achieve equity

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2024. 7p.

Issue Brief #3  

By Richard A. Mendel

   Young people’s likelihood of avoiding future justice system contact and achieving success is affected not only by whether or not their cases are diverted from the justice system, but also by how their cases are handled once diverted. A growing consensus among youth justice experts supports several priorities regarding how best to organize and utilize youth diversion. Move responsibility for diverted youth out of the court system Too often, youth diverted from formal processing in court are overseen by prosecutors or probation officers in a process that can mirror traditional probation supervision. In 2020, the latest year for which data are available, more than 32,000 youth whose cases were not formally processed in court were nonetheless placed on probation caseloads. In practice, this type of informal probation often differs little from formal probation, with a long list of rules and requirements and the threat of returning to court for prosecution if youth don’t meet all expectations imposed on them. Adolescent development research and practical experience suggest strongly that this approach is misguided. Rather, the best practice is to divert youth away from the justice system and empower community partner organizations, as well as schools and families, to address young people’s misbehavior.

Issue Brief #2

Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project, 2024. 6p.

By  Sonja E. Siennick, William M. Casey, Brian J. Stults, Jhon A. Pupo, Dequan J. Cowell, Theodore R. Fronczak

This project was a three-year effort to (1) describe states’ current practices regarding the measurement of juvenile recidivism, (2) compare the rates and predictors of different measures of recidivism that varied in terms of marker events, follow-up lengths, and inclusion of adult system information, (3) compare the amount of program- and community-level variation in recidivism across different measures of recidivism, and (4) assist the state of Oregon in exploring potential changes to its current measure of juvenile recidivism. The study was a collaborative effort between Florida State University (FSU), the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (FDJJ), and the Oregon Youth Authority (OYA). Archival data from FDJJ and OYA offered an opportunity to do what researchers had previously been unable to: analyze several different permutations of a reoffending measure based on the same sets of youth, and assess the robustness of findings across those permutations. The extent and prediction of juvenile reoffending are of considerable research and policy importance.

Tallahassee, FL:  Florida State University, 2023. 93p.

By  Suojellaan Lapsia, Protect Children

A new report by Suojellaan Lapsia, Protect Children provides chilling insights on the ways offenders use mainstream tech platforms to access and distribute child sexual abuse material (CSAM, the more apt term for "child pornography"). Some highlights:

• 77% of surveyed CSAM offenders have encountered CSAM or links to CSAM on the surface web (e.g. on a social media platform, a pornography website, a messaging app, or other mainstream website) 

• 32% say that they have used social media platforms to search for, view, or disseminate CSAM.

  • The top platforms used for this purpose were Instagram (29%), X (Twitter) (26%), and Discord (23%).

• 40% said they sought contact with a child after viewing CSAM

• Of those, 70% sought such contact online (e.g. on social media platforms, gaming platforms, or messaging apps

Suojellaan Lapsia, Protect Children ry, 2024. 35p.

By Susan Burke, et al

This Code of Practice document provides guidelines that were designed to guide juvenile justice administrators as they establish policies, procedures, and practices in alignment with research-supported evidence, and to promote discussion within jurisdictions on existing practices. The document is divided into five primary sections: general policy considerations; training; de-escalation and nonphysical interventions; physical interventions; and after-action reviews. The “General Policy Considerations” section provides guidance on how agencies can create and educate staff on their use of force continuum. The sections are presented in a sequence that aims to reinforce their dependency and relationship to other components. The document concludes with sections of term definitions and links resources cited.

Hingham, MA: The Council of Juvenile Justice Administrators (CJJA) , et al, 2023. 24p.

By Sarah Hockenberry; Charles Puzzanchera

Juvenile Court Statistics 2021 draws on data from the National Juvenile Court Data Archive to profile 437,300 delinquency cases and 51,500 petitioned status offense cases handled in 2021 by U.S. courts with juvenile jurisdiction. The report also tracks trends in delinquency and petitioned status cases between 2005 and 2021. The data used in this report were contributed to the Archive by nearly 2,400 courts with jurisdiction over 83% of the juvenile population in 2021. National estimates of juvenile court delinquency caseloads in 2021 were based on analyses of 299,432 automated case records and court-level statistics summarizing an additional 29,369 cases. Estimates of status offense cases formally processed by juvenile courts in 2021 were based on analyses of 32,897 automated case-level records and court-level summary statistics on an additional 2,852 cases. The data used in the analyses were contributed to the National Juvenile Court Data Archive by nearly 2,400 courts with jurisdiction over 83% of the juvenile population in 2021. Courts with juvenile jurisdiction may handle a variety of matters, including child maltreatment, traffic violations, child support, and adoptions. This report focuses on cases involving juveniles charged with law violations (delinquency or status offenses).

Pittsburgh: National Center for Juvenile Justice, 2024. 114p.

By Sharon Pette

This white paper provides recommendations for programming for youth ages 17 and older residing in secure custody setting and provides policy, practice, and legislative considerations that may warrant future exploration by juvenile justice professionals and policymakers. The goal of this publication is to provide the audience with program-related resources for working with these youth and introduce potential funding resources for age-appropriate programming. This paper also intends to bring to the forefront the shared challenges that juvenile justice facilities face when serving older individuals and offers feasible solutions to these challenges.  The Center for Coordinated Assistance to States and its partner recommend the innovative practices offered in this document for working with older youth.

Washington, DC: OJJDP, 2024. 29p

By Millie Harris and Mia Edwards  

This evidence review, part of a funded by Barrow Cadbury Trust, summarises the policy context and existing evidence on young people turning 18 in the criminal justice system.

The review sets out available data on the numbers and characteristics of young people in transition in the criminal justice system. It examines young people’s experiences of transition between Youth Offending Team and adult Probation; from the children’s secure estate to adult prison; the experiences of young people at risk of harm, particularly criminal exploitation; and disparities in transition and the support available to racially minoritised young people. The review considers the multiple other transitions outside of the criminal justice system impacting young people as they turn 18.

This evidence base will inform the project’s research priorities and the development of thematic policy briefings and recommendations across the project’s three thematic focuses: custody, safeguarding young people at risk, and racial injustice.

London: Alliance for Youth Justice, 2023. 54p.

By Alliance for Youth Justice  

This briefing explores how racially minoritised young people experience particularly destabilising transitions due to deficits in support before and after turning 18. It highlights the crucial role the ‘by and for’ voluntary and community sector plays in addressing these shortfalls, arguing for reforms to better facilitate and fund the sector’s involvement in racially minoritised young people’s lives.

London: Alliance for Youth Justice, 2024. 53p.

By Anna Laura Baraldi, Erasmo Papagni and Marco Stimolo 

Organised crime tightens its corrupting influence on politics through violent intimidation. Anti-crime measures that increase the cost of corruption but not of the exercise of violence might accordingly lead mafia-style organizations to retaliate by resorting to violence in lieu of bribery. On the other hand, this kind of anti-crime measure might also induce criminal clans to go inactive, owing to the lower expected payoff from the "business" of influencing politics, which would reduce violence. To determine which of these possible effects is prevalent, we undertake an empirical assessment of the impact of city council dissolution for mafia influence in Italy as prescribed by Decree Law 164/1991 in discouraging violence against politicians in the period 2010-2019. Our difference-in-differences analysis shows that in the dissolved municipalities the enforcement of the Law reduces violence and that the effect persists (at least) for two electoral rounds. The most likely driving channel of this result is the renewed pool of politicians elected after compulsory administration. These findings are robust to a series of endogeneity tests.

Working Paper No. 010.2023

Publisher: 

Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM), Milano

By Soeren C. Schwuchow

We study a model that establishes a novel theoretical rationale for the empirically well-documented relation between inequality and corruption. According to our model, inequality can nurture corruption by empowering organized crime because collusion between local police forces and criminal organizations is more likely in societies characterized by high inequality or weak security forces. Law enforcement and organized crime have a strong incentive to collude due to efficiency gains from specialization. However, their agreement breaks down when the mobsters can no longer credibly commit to joint rent maximization and thus start to compete with law enforcement for citizens’ wealth. The mobsters then non-violently monopolize the market for extortion by undercutting the police forces, similar to a strategy of predatory pricing. Criminal collusion is thus not very different from its corporate equivalent; hence, similar policy measures should be promising. In addition, our model also suggests that the criminal organization’s higher efficiency in extracting rents has a greater impact when the relative power between law enforcement and organized crime is rather balanced. Accordingly, when violent conflict becomes less predictable, non-violent elements of relative power become more relevant. Our model also allows for the interpretation that in the absence of strong social norms against corruption, organized crime is more difficult to challenge.

Eur J Law Econ 55, 469–509 (2023).

By Jamie Bergin  

Various customs administrations have reported that their officials are physically threatened by organised criminal groups to abuse their power and facilitate illicit activities, such as drug trafficking. This Helpdesk Answer conceptually analyses how organised criminal groups use corruption and physical threats to influence customs officials and enable their profit-making activities, before describing how applying certain integrity measures could potentially prevent and counter the emergence of such threats.

Berlin: U4 Helpdesk Answer. U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre and Transparency International , 2023. 18p.

By Michelle Jeanis, Meng Ru Shih, Bryanna Fox

Background: Studies have shown that Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) greatly effect negative life outcomes, especially delinquency. However, some variables and their roles remain elusive, and pathways to delinquency have not been fully explored.

Objective: The study proposes to (1) identify whether running away is an initial delinquency or a result of ACEs, (2) examine the similarities and differences of chronic and one-time ACEs on gender and delinquency and (3) further examine the role of exposure to violence by gender.

Participants and Setting: The study uses the public accessible data in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health).

Methods: The study used factorial logistic regression models to analyze the ACEs and their influence on juvenile behavior.

Results: Chronic neglect (Female: β=.74; Male: β=.43) and multiple exposures to violence (ETV) (Female: β=1.43; Male: β=.94) were significantly related to reporting property crime in both genders. Gender differences are apparent. Girls who reported single-time physical abuse (β=1.93) and multiple ETVs (β=3.19) are more likely to commit violent offenses. Also, multiple ETVs (three types: β=2.123; four types: β=3.38; five types: β=3.90) are most significant for explaining violent offending among boys. Runaway behavior functions as a condition to the occurrence of juvenile offending, rather than a predictor.

Conclusions: ACEs typically affect boys and girls differently. Running away appears to shape the delinquency experience but does not fully mediate it. Policy implications are discussed.

Unpublished paper, 2024.