The first section of the paper discusses how community policing developed out of dissatisfaction with the antagonism caused by the warrior model of policing. It defines community policing as an organizational strategy that requires citizens, at the neighborhood level, to meet regularly with police to define neighborhood crime problems and set police priorities. Community policing is contrasted with the "judicial control" model, under which judges attempt to regulate police conduct through enforcement of the Fourth Amendment. Section II of the paper develops the argument that community policing has failed to change the way in which inner-city youth are policed, since youth are less likely than older residents to be involved in community meetings and other venues where the agenda for community policing is set. Further, youth tend to be the targets of police-citizen agendas, as they are more likely to be stopped and illegally searched by police on the streets. Section III of the paper argues that the police must establish their and the law's legitimacy with youth and young adults through policing practices that are perceived as procedurally fair. Further, they must be drawn into responsible roles in improving the quality of life in the communities where they live. The concluding section of the paper describes in greater detail a model of community policing that engages youth in community building. Examples of the model are provided in novel and promising policing experiments in Chicago and Boston. 206 notes