Recommended: Juveniles rights
This case appears to shed light on a situation where many juveniles before Kent could have not been given the right protection of due process under the 5th and 14th amendment in the constitution. In re Gault (1967) Citation: Kent v. United States, 383 U. S. 541, 562 (1966) Procedural History: Gault was taken into custody on a compliant that he had made lewd telephone calls to his neighbor. He was taken into custody while his parents was at work and they was not notified and came home looking for him. Issue: Were the procedures used to commit Gault constitutionally legitimate under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Should juveniles have the same due process rights as adults?
But at the same time, they didn’t have an overview of the situation so their assumptions that their child was becoming “rebellious” was based on “parental instincts” instead of the
People argue that some juveniles are “too young and they don’t understand” but either way, they still broke the law and should be fairly punished. A fact stating “There are approximately 6,000 juveniles in adult jails and prisons in the United States” shows that people who have broken the law with felonies have been confined by law, no matter the age. People need to learn before they act in a similar manner, again. A similar case is a boy named Craig Price from Rhode Island who had committed multiple felonies, such as four murders and was charged as a minor, meaning he was arrested around age 16 and would get out and have his criminal record sealed at age 21. Because of this, a law was changed so that juveniles could be tried as adults with serious crimes.
It is shocking to know that before 1967 youths in the United States did not have the same rights as adults in court. Before the landmark case In Re Gault individuals underage were not promised the freedoms under the fourteenth amendment. The court system did not take juvenile delinquent cases as seriously. It was almost as if they brushed the delinquents under the rug and put them into a detention center the first chance they got. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that in the case of In Re Gault the requirements for due process were not met.
Many of them are being tried as adults and receiving verdicts that are not meant for teens. Take 16-year-old Steve Harmon from the book "Monster" by Walter Dean Myers. He was involved in a robbery as a lookout and was arrested and tried for the first-degree murder of Mr. Nesbit in an adult court. Is that fair? I don’t think so.
Simmons. First of all, minors are tried differently in court than adults. According to www.law2.umkc.edu, “ the Court considered whether it was cruel and unusual punishment to execute a prisoner for a crime he committed when he was a minor.” This shows that minors do not get tried as severely as adults. The article also added, “In previous decisions, the Court had found it unconstitutional to execute persons who were less than 16 at the time of their crime, but had upheld executions of those 16 and 17 at the time of their crimes.”
Juveniles should be trialed as adults because they cannot commit more crime when they are in jail, hey cannot commit worse crimes, and itm is safer for the community. I think that juveniles who are under 18 should get trialed as adults. In 2012 the supreme court ruled that Juveniles under the age of 18 can not receive a life sentence or be put to death without parole (lauck). But what if some one under 18 committed a crime that a 23 year old committed why should one get life or be put to death while the other one gets a smack on the wrist and gets away scot free, the under aged person can be just as bad as someone who is over 18.
In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that it is immoral to give juveniles life sentences, even if they commit a crime as serious as murder, because it is a cruel and unusual punishment. This has been an issue in America as teenagers are often treated as adults in court due to a belief that their crimes warrant a harsh punishment. Many believe that these kids should not be given such major sentences because they are still immature and do not have the self control that adults do. I agree that juveniles do not deserve life sentences because they put less thought and planning into these crimes and they often are less malicious than adults. The article “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains” explains that the teenagers lose brain tissue that is responsible for self control and impulses (Thompson 7).
As people might argue that teens should not be tried as adults because they are only children and they do not realize their actions;
How Youth’s Individual Rights are Protected by the Federal Government. Individual rights impact youth’s lives and experiences in many ways. These rights can preserve the quality of life for many of them, while also ensuring their safety. To guarantee that their lives are protected, ther Charter of Rights and Freedoms, along with the YCJA, which specifically targets youths was created. These have both influenced many youth’s lives leading to personal experiences that can benefit others as well.
There are many children in the world who are being put behind bars and detained for alleged wrongdoing without protections they are entitled to. Throughout the world, children are charged and sentenced for actions that should not be considered as adult crimes. Here in the United States, the minimum age of criminal responsibility is age 12. Law enforcement officials and those in the juvenile justice system nationwide tend to mistreat underage individuals by trying cases while working through the lens of an adult. Unfair punishments are still handed down domestically, which is in violation of Supreme Court law.
Lastly, in some states; there are age of majority statutes which automatically prosecute sixteen and/or seventeen years old depending on the state as adults (Campaign for Youth
Juvenile Justice Should juveniles get treated as adults that’s one of the biggest controversy in our nation now days, with many juveniles committing crimes that are inconceivable according to their age. Judges have the last word on how to treat this young people. Many people argue that “the teens that are under eighteen are only kids, they won’t count them as young adults, not until they commit crimes. And the bigger the crime, the more eager this people are to call them adults” (Lundstrom 87). This is why people can’t come to a decision as how these young people should be treated like.
Can you imagine waking up behind closed walls and bars? Waking up to see your inmate who is a 45-year-old bank robber and you are a 14-year-old minor who made a big mistake. This is why minors who have committed crimes should not be treated the same as adults. Some reasons are because the consequences given to minors in adult court would impact a minor’s life in a negative way. If a minor is tried through a juvenile court, they have a greater chance of rehabilitation.
Voting for the election is a very huge thing to care about because once the election is over the winner of the election will be the president of the United States and will be choosing what to do for the country for you. It isn’t fair that only 18 older and up could only vote for the president. The reason why is because researches have shown that in most recent elections 16 year olds and 17 years old are way more interested in the elections then the 18-23 year olds. Only because these kids are still at school talking to their teachers about the election while the 18 year olds are either going to college or going straight to work, and most of the time when students go straight to work they might never vote ever in their life and if he or she chooses to vote that person might have knowledge of what he or she is voting or might not know what he or she is voting for and vote for the wrong things. I found a quote in the article that I am reading and Richie said that “Eighteen year olds are not very good
