Racial Justice
The Snapshot is based on a state-by-state analysis of the statutes that govern children’s access to counsel and interviews with juvenile defenders about how statutes and court rules translate into practice. The interviews were conducted with attorneys in urban and rural areas to explore differences in practices and resources. In total, 70 interviews were completed…
The Ten Core Principles for Providing Quality Delinquency Representation through Public Defense Delivery Systems provide criteria by which a public defense delivery system may fully implement the holding of In re Gault. These Principles offer guidance to public defense leaders and policymakers regarding the role of public defenders, contract attorneys, or assigned counsel in delivering…
Creates a case for holding states liable for abdicating their duty to ensure that all children have zealous representation.
Provides a framework for developing effective youth defense systems.
From the introduction: “During adolescence, physical and cognitive changes combine with new social contexts in ways that increase our sensitivity to belonging and earning respect from those around us. This heightened attention to our place in a wider social world motivates us to adapt to the more complex social demands of adulthood. Following are 5…
From the introduction: “During adolescence, we form a deeper sense of who we are, what we value, and who we want to be. Healthy development in adolescence involves creating a positive sense of self and belonging, based on our values and aspirations. Following are five facts about how we develop our values, goals, and identity…
From the executive summary: “• Police increasingly replace stop-and-frisk practices with databases that crudely profile Black and Latinx youth based on their neighborhoods, peer groups, and clothing. • These databases ruin lives: police typecast minority youths as gang members without evidence, putting them at risk of false arrest and wrongful deportation. • Many police departments…
The Court considers a question of first impression — whether a criminal defendant must be provided in-person interpreting services, rather than video remote interpreting (VRI) services, at his jury trial.
