Is There a Jurisprudential Future for the Juvenile Court?

Abstract

This article considers the arguments for abolition of the juvenile court and suggests that its proponents may not go far enough in their proposals to dismantle the juvenile court's delinquency jurisdiction. While eliminating the juvenile court's delinquency jurisdiction may be justifiable given the court's emphasis on punishment and control, any such proposal also must account for the institutional effects on the court. Particularly, proponents of abolishing the court's delinquency jurisdiction on grounds that it is a flawed criminal court must consider whether that criticism also provides justification for abolition of the juvenile court's status offense jurisdiction since status offenders also are subject to state control for their behaviors. Moreover, even if a separate juvenile court is retained, proponents of abolishing the court's delinquency jurisdiction must take into account the institutional consequences of changing the court's caseload. In light of the juvenile court's social control functions, the use of state power and authority over petty and noncriminal juvenile offenders, and the implications for a coherent account of rights, this article suggests that abolition requires a more significant restructuring than has been previously suggested.