In Re Gault
"In Re Gault" is a landmark Supreme Court case that fundamentally reshaped the juvenile justice system in the United States. The case involved a fifteen-year-old boy, Gerald Gault, who was committed to a juvenile detention center without proper notification to his parents. The Supreme Court, led by Justice Abe Fortas, ruled in an 8-1 decision that juveniles are entitled to the same due process rights as adults, including the right to notice, legal counsel, the ability to confront witnesses, and protection against self-incrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment. This ruling emerged during a time when the treatment of juveniles was evolving, as there had been increasing concerns about the rising crime rates among youth and the call for a more formal approach to juvenile adjudication. The decision affirmed the importance of fairness and legal protections within the juvenile justice system, reflecting a broader movement to protect the rights of all individuals accused of crimes, including minors. The dissenting opinions raised questions about the implications of this ruling for the distinction between juvenile and adult justice systems. Overall, "In Re Gault" remains a significant case in the ongoing discussions about juvenile rights and the role of due process in the legal treatment of young offenders.
On this Page
In Re Gault
Date: May 15, 1967
Citation: 387 U.S. 1
Issue: Juvenile justice
Significance: The Supreme Court, in a landmark decision, provided for the rights of juveniles accused of committing crimes
Justice Abe Fortas, writing for an 8-1 majority, upheld a habeas corpus petition for a fifteen-year-old boy who had been sent to a juvenile detention center without notice to his parents. The Supreme Court ruled that juveniles had to be accorded the same rights of notice, rights to legal counsel and to confront and cross-examine witnesses, and privilege against self-incrimination as were accorded to adults under the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
For most of the twentieth century, juveniles were treated differently than adults in the belief that juveniles should have less adversarial, more informal adjudication of criminal activity. As the numbers of juveniles committing crimes rose, calls for more control increased. In a parallel development, the Court, under Chief Justice Earl Warren, also attempted to increase the protections for those accused of crimes, including juveniles, as in this ruling. In his partial dissent, Justice John M. Harlan II questioned whether Gault was a proper use of the due process clause. Justice Potter Stewart dissented, arguing that the decision made the juvenile and adult systems too similar.
Bibliography
Abadinsky, Howard. "Juvenile Justice." Law, Courts, and Justice in America. 7th ed. Long Grove: Waveland, 2014. 356–78. Print.
Dorsen, Norman, and Daniel A. Rezneck. "In Re Gault and the Future of Juvenile Law." Family Law Quarterly 1.4 (1967): 1–46. Print.
Kurlychek, Megan. "Juvenile Court." Wiley Online Library. Wiley, 22 Jan. 2014. Web. 8 Jan. 2016.
Gold, Susan Dudley. In Re Gault: Do Minors Have the Same Rights as Adults? New York: Marshall, 2008. Print. Supreme Court Milestones.
Tanenhaus, David S. The Constitutional Rights of Children: In re Gault and Juvenile Justice. Lawrence: UP of Kansas, 2011. Print.