The single most important Supreme Court case with respect to juvenile justice is In re Gault. Briefly describe the case and its impact on the juvenile justice system

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

The nature of the juvenile court process remained unchanged until the 1960s. When the Warren Court began to scrutinize procedures in adult criminal courts, its attention turned also to juvenile courts. In a groundbreaking decision, the Supreme Court held in In re Gault (1967) that the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment applied to juvenile court proceedings. The court emphasized that "under our Constitution the condition of being a boy does not justify a kangaroo court.". The opinion specified that juveniles have: (1) the right to notice, (2) the right to counsel, (3) the right to confront witnesses, and (4) privilege against self-incrimination. (See Case Close-Up: In re Gault and Due Process in Juvenile Courts.) Three years later, the Court ruled that when a juvenile is charged with an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult, then every element of that criminal act must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt (In re Winship 1970). Gault and Winship signaled that the juvenile court must become a real court and its procedures must be regularized in accordance with constitutional requirements. Juvenile courts, however, afford far fewer due process rights than their adult counterparts.