Following the promulgation of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and prior to the Court's decision in United States v. R.L.C., a juvenile could be sentenced to a term longer than an adult for committing an identical crime. The Supreme Court decision imported the Federal Sentencing Guidelines into juvenile sentencing, thereby violating clearly expressed legislative intent of the Crime Control Act. The introduction of adversarial dispositional proceedings into the juvenile forum also violated the legislature's intent that those proceedings remain informal and protective. The dissent of Justices O'Connor and Blackmun called for the handling of juveniles as a separate group. In view of these points, Congress should overrule the Court's decision and should lead the movement for national juvenile justice guidelines in a way that extricates juveniles from the strictures of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and promotes the traditional rehabilitative ideal. Footnotes