Due Process
The Idaho District Court rules that an antiloitering city ordinance is unconstitutionally vague and offers the following language in support. “It is a basic principle of due process that an enactment is void for vagueness if its prohibitions are not clearly defined.” Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108, 92 S. Ct. 2294,…
From the conclusion” “Conclusion There is no question that the statistical picture of special education is bleak. But after its meeting of stakeholders, interviews with experts, and review of the research, NCD believes that IDEA and other related disability laws, with improved enforcement, can and should benefit at-risk students who are properly referred and served.…
The Gault Center submitted an amicus brief in the Supreme Court of Ohio on a case involving a young person’s right to appeal a competence and transfer determination in juvenile court after entering a guilty plea in adult court. Outlining procedural justice arguments and the constitutional right to a competency and transfer hearing, the brief…
On April 9, 2025, the Oregon Court of Appeals found that a probation condition ordering a youth “to follow probation conditions as designated by OYA [the Oregon Youth Authority]” was legally insufficient to determine whether a young person violated a term of their probation. The Court explained, “without knowing what probation conditions OYA had actually…
From the Abstract: In Maine, there is no such thing as a child too young to be prosecuted. Maine’s Juvenile Code grants the juvenile court jurisdiction over a child of any age, even one who would have been considered too young to prosecute in the fifteenth century. As of 2024, just over half of states…
From the introduction: “In this Article, [the author] examines the question of whether state courts, under their state constitutions, may be better suited than federal courts to provide effective remedial measures designed to ensure that criminal defendants receive effective assistance of counsel in criminal prosecutions.”
On February 28, 2025, the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court’s denial of a racial justice expert violated a young person’s due process rights to present a defense. This case involved an altercation between two middle school students involving the use of a racial slur and other racially derogatory comments. Defense counsel…
The New Jersey Supreme Court held the Family Part did not abuse its discretion when it decided to hear the State’s request for waiver motion before E.S.’s suppression motion. The court declined to adopt a bright line rule for the order in which a Family Part should hear waiver and suppression motions but instead provided…
On August 29, 2024, the Gault Center hosted a National Youth Defense Townhall focused on the role of youth defenders in transforming the juvenile legal system. The Townhall outlined a theory of change rooted in cultivating critical connections to harness our collective power to transform systems of harm and punishment. In attendance were nearly 200…
The Oregon Court of Appeals held that the court must provide constitutionally adequate notice to a young person of a requirement to appear in person rather than remotely before making a finding of “failure to appear”. The court stated in relevant part: “Fundamental principles of due process require that an individual be provided with notice…
The Court of Appeals of Washington remanded a transfer case to the superior court and offered the following language in support. “Our Supreme Court has made clear that trial courts must be vigilant in addressing the threat of explicit or implicit racial bias that affects a defendant’s right to a fair trial. We hold that…
