As the court system works to catch up from pandemic disruptions, many courts continue to use remote technology or are testing new ways to incorporate it. But groups that advocate for criminal-justice reform and juvenile justice are voicing concerns. They say these steps raise questions about litigants' rights, their access to representation and other resources.

Especially with children, said Veronica Williams, who founded Mothers Against Wrongful Convictions, it's important for them to feel they have a support system, and in-person relationships can be key.

"When they are dealing with court hearings and proceedings, we have to understand that they are fragile," she said. "And when they become fragile, they can become disoriented. And if we're not careful, we lose them in the system."

Research has found children are more likely to be perceived as less accurate, believable or consistent if they testify by video. In a study by the Stanford Criminal Justice Center, 66% of respondents said "going remote" has compromised attorney-client communication, making it harder to have confidential conversations and build relationships.

Without universal access to high-speed internet, said Doug Keith, a counsel with the Brennan Center for Justice, many attorneys working during the pandemic have reported poor audio or video quality. He noted that 4% of Americans and 9% of those in rural areas lack access to broadband.

"Twenty-six percent of people in the Black, rural South and 18% of people on tribal lands lack such access," he said, "so it's clear that there are significant communities across this country, and within most states, that have disparate access to this technology."

He said there are some contexts where remote hearings can be beneficial - for instance, in civil cases with low-income parties who may have limited time off work, or for legal-aid organizations to reach underserved areas of their states. But he said it's important to take a careful look at whether proceedings can have better outcomes in person.

Advocates for juvenile justice reform in Washington are celebrating the passage of House Bill 1815. The law redefines "prison riot" and lets judges expunge past rioting charges for young people.

Previously, incarcerated youths could get felony convictions and up to 10 years added to their sentence for any fight involving two or more people.

Anthony Powers, founder of the American Equity and Justice Group, helped draft the law after hearing from incarcerated youths at Green Hill School in Chehalis.

"One guy had nine years from three fistfights where nobody got hurt," Powers explained. "And then it had this whole ripple effect of things, because now they got more time, now they're more miserable. Now you've got other things that start to escalate."

Green Hill School is a state-operated juvenile facility that has seen many young men convicted of riot charges in the last few years. Powers adds the law was disproportionately impacting young men of color, and that the new law will help with overcrowding.

Some Republicans in the Washington Senate criticized the change, saying it could mean letting people off the hook for serious misconduct. Powers disagrees, saying the old law did not make sense.

"If we're trying to get people on the inside to mirror behaviors on the outside so they become healthy and productive citizens, then how are we going to have one standard for them that's completely to the extreme from what somebody would be charged with out in society," he continued.

Rep, Strom Peterson, D-Edmonds, who sponsored the bill, explained along with the extended sentence, a Prison Riot charge can come with tens of thousands of dollars in fines, which becomes another hurdle for people when they re-enter society.

"You're seeing these young men getting out of incarceration at 18 or 20 years old. And after they've served an extra couple of years, maybe for this felony, and then they're leaving with a $10,000 fine, with really no hope of paying that off," he said.

Peterson added that within a week of the bill's passage, 11 young people were released from custody after their riot charges were dropped.


get more stories like this via email

Two bills aimed at reforming the juvenile justice system in Illinois are close to becoming law.

Senate Bill 1784 proposes raising the age of detention from 10 to 13 and Senate Bill 2156 seeks to ensure front-line responders can access the appropriate services for children in crisis to avoid detention, if possible.

Elizabeth Clarke, founder and executive director of the Juvenile Justice Initiative, said research shows jailing children for any amount of time is harmful and can cause long-term consequences, affecting their quality of life, especially for children of color.

"The Juvenile Justice Commission has filed numerous reports over the years looking at the children who are actually detained," Clarke pointed out. "And in every report, it is disproportionately used for children who are Black and brown."

She added for children ages 10-12, the racial disparities are even more dramatic. Both bills passed the state Senate. Senate Bill 1784 passed a House committee Tuesday.

Efforts to end detention of young children across the state have been ongoing. Illinois currently has 14 juvenile detention centers covering 102 counties, with only three regularly meeting basic standards. Clarke pointed out besides the fact jailing children does not guarantee an increase in public safety, it is also costly.

"These two bills together offer a unique opportunity to help our children and help our taxpayers as well," Clarke asserted. "By front-loading resources so that you use the least expensive and most effective interventions to keep children out of the justice system."

Clarke emphasized a key aspect of one bill is to create a task force to help identify the resources needed for front-line responders. Probation departments would report monthly on service gaps to facilitate resource allocation.

"Whether it's a crisis that leads to some sort of prosecution or a behavioral health crisis, whatever it is, people want to do the right thing," Clarke observed. "But law enforcement, who are often the first responders, don't always know exactly where to turn, or how to do the right thing."

A new report examined differences in state juvenile justice system financing, looking at how local control can improve outcomes.

The report, "Transforming Juvenile Justice Through Strategic Financing," compared seven states and highlighted Ohio's RECLAIM initiative as influential. RECLAIM began in 1993 and encouraged courts to implement community-based alternatives to youth incarceration, with the aim of decreasing the likelihood of repeated arrest.

Gabriella Celeste, policy director for the Schubert Center for Child Studies at Case Western Reserve University, said RECLAIM and its recent updates have transformed the state's juvenile justice system.

"In the last 10 years or so, it's really upped its game, the state of Ohio, in ensuring that the kinds of interventions are based on what works with kids," Celeste explained. "That's where we see the new kind of iterations of RECLAIM, the Targeted RECLAIM, and especially Competitive RECLAIM."

Ohio has seen declines in youth incarceration over the past two decades, with the average daily youth population in correctional facilities falling from nearly 1,700 in 2005 to around 500 in recent years. The number of young people on parole declined 84% over the same period.

The average cost to house a juvenile in prison nationally is estimated to be $500 per day, or more than $200,000 a year, with some states above $500,000. The report found community-based programs are far cheaper with some costing as little as $75 a day.

Celeste pointed out alternative placements have been effective at reducing recidivism and improving other measures of youth well-being.

"With kids we want to be thinking about other wellness-related outcomes," Celeste outlined. "Are they engaged in school? Are they discontinuing use of substances? Are they progressing with a treatment program? But we tend to just look at one thing when it comes to kids in the justice system, and that's recidivism, which is important, but safety includes a number of other factors."

Alternative placements often include community services, which can more readily meet individualized needs among kids in the justice system. Courts can mandate individual and family therapy along with addiction programs. Celeste said mentorship programs have also gained popularity.

"There's increasingly a recognition that people who themselves have had experience or lived experience, whether in the system or as family members connected with loved ones in the system," Celeste observed. "They are themselves, kind of credible messengers, and they can play a really effective mentoring role with kids and young people."

The report looked at funding dynamics and programs in 11 localities among the seven states.


get more stories like this via email