In
the early twentieth century, society began to differentiate childhood from
adulthood and began to value youth developmental status as a vulnerable period
of transition. The State expanded its involvement in youth policy as child
savers in reaction to the industrial revolution and mass immigration. The use
of reformed Houses of Refuge played an intricate role in educating as well as
correcting violent youth’s behavior to conform to societies standards (Morrill Lecture).
Compulsory education, child labor regulations, and the introduction of social
organizations such as the YMCA attempted to maintain the innocence of children.
The economic downturn of the Great Depression created an extended hiatus
between childhood and adulthood and brought a national youth policy into
existence. The 1935 National Youth Administration exposed the need for reform
in public education and attempted to educate and train all children, including
Negroes and girls. The reemergence
of prosperity post WWII accompanied a social push for all adolescences to
graduate from high school. By the
1960s, the youth gained a personal interest in public policy and took
significant action in the Civil Rights Movement (Morrill Lecture). Violent and
nonviolent youth protests sparked some fear within society. New court decisions
redefined the juvenile court structure and allowed juveniles the right to an
attorney. The War on Poverty launched certain programs and focused on providing
work opportunities for disadvantaged youth. The ups and downs of the American
System all seem to lead in a more fair and progressive legal tradition, yet
injustice still existed at times as stated In
Re Gault (1967). Despite all the
steps taken to make legal action toward juveniles just, the court failed in
their judgment of Gault and incorrectly sentenced him for his crime. Thankfully
the court system in the U.S. is open to appeals making this particular case
appear in the Supreme Court where Gault’s 14th Amendment rights of
Due Process were granted.
At
the time this case was heard, judges were to decide cases involving juveniles
as clinical (rehabilitation) rather than punitive (punishment) (Morrill Lecture).
The term parens patriae is used in
describing juvenile justice and how youth are looked at as dependents and that
it is the states job to make sure youth best interests are being looked out for(Morrill
Lecture). Gerald Gault was a 15-year-old boy that was taken into custody,
without his parent’s knowledge, after an alleged lewd prank calls to a neighbor
(In Re Gault). At the trial both Gerald Gault’s father and the complainant,
Ora Cook, were not present along with Gault’s procedural rights not being taken
into account. Some of these rights include the case and trial proceedings be
recorded for future appeals to the decision. Gault was sentence severely harsher
than an adult for the same crime. An adult charged with the same crime would
have received a maximum of a 50-dollar fine and two months in jail (Morrill Lecture).
Once this case reached the U.S. Supreme Court Gault’s lawyer argued that the
juvenile codes were invalid basing his assertion on the 14th
Amendment Due Process rights: (1) notice of the charges with regard to their
timeliness and specificity, (2) right to council, (3) right to confrontation
and cross-examination, (4) privilege against self-incrimination, (5) right to a
transcript of the trial record, and (6) right to appellate review (Morrill Lecture
and In Re Gault). The Supreme Court as well as for future juvenile cases
decided these six rights necessary for a fair trial and should be extended to
all individuals.
Gerald
Gault's rights were violated regardless of being an adult or not. As an
American citizen he deserved the same treatment as any other individual that
appears in court. Thankfully the Supreme Court recognized Gault’s rights being
violated and made the necessary decision to reform how juvenile cases would be
tried and decided. Before this case the law neglected youth/juveniles, and this
case was instrumental in giving youth equal rights to adults in the courtroom. Although
the 14th Amendment was not initially thought to apply to cases like
Gault, the inclusion of the Due Process Clause continually proved its
importance for juvenile cases. This case was progressive in the Supreme Courts
ruling to recognize the rights of youth and not treat them as unequal citizens
compared to adults.
"In Re Gault - 387 U.S. 1
(1967)." Justia US Supreme Court Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 01
Feb. 2014.
Morrill, Calvin. "Youth, Justice,
and Culture." Leconte 3, Berkeley. 30 Jan.
2014. Lecture.
