Juvenile Justice After Graham v. Florida: Keeping Due Process, Autonomy, and Paternalism in Balance

Legal disputes involving children invariably evoke a complex matrix of issues such as child and adolescent capacity, individual rights and autonomy, parental authority, and in the criminal justice context—diminished culpability for a minor‘s actions. While it is difficult to identify a clear and coh...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Henning, Kristin (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Buch
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2012
In:Jahr: 2012
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866126954
003 DE-627
005 20250122054855.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866126954 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866126954 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Henning, Kristin  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
109 |a Henning, Kristin 
245 1 0 |a Juvenile Justice After Graham v. Florida: Keeping Due Process, Autonomy, and Paternalism in Balance 
264 1 |c 2012 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Legal disputes involving children invariably evoke a complex matrix of issues such as child and adolescent capacity, individual rights and autonomy, parental authority, and in the criminal justice context—diminished culpability for a minor‘s actions. While it is difficult to identify a clear and cohesive jurisprudence regarding the balance between children‘s autonomy and children‘s vulnerability across Supreme Court cases, a series of cases over the last decade, including Roper v. Simmons, Graham v. Florida, and J.D.B. v. North Carolina, offer a more consistent view of children as vulnerable, malleable, and in need of protection, at least in the criminal and delinquency context. In each of these cases, the Court solidly reaffirms the view that youth lack maturity and are more susceptible to negative influences. Specifically, this Essay considers Graham‘s impact on the ever-changing philosophy of the juvenile justice system, which is often at a crossroads between its rehabilitative, punitive, and due process agendas. The Supreme Court‘s affirmation in Graham of research on the important developmental differences between juveniles and adults may reinvigorate the rehabilitative goal of traditional juvenile courts and challenge the recent trend toward more punitive juvenile justice policies. However, it may also signal a shift back to a more paternalistic approach to children‘s law and policy, including reduced autonomy for youth and greater state intervention in the lives of children 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/233188057.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4391807718 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866126954 
LOK |0 005 20231018043640 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE69646371 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw