Juvenile justice stands at a crossroads today, reflected in no small part by calls for its abolishment. Juvenile justice faces a unique challenge balancing an era of “get tough” crime policies with the “best interests” of youth, providing individualized treatments and services, and punishment. Even though it is most probable that the juvenile justices system will remain separate from the adult justice system, State legislatures have shown willingness, based on assumptions about what the public supports, to substantially modify the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. In some cases, this means lowering the upper age of original jurisdiction and in others creating a multitude of transfer options enabling the sending of young offenders to adult court. What has been seen throughout history is public support taken for granted from the inception of the juvenile court and used in recent years to justify criminalizing juvenile justice. In a survey of Florida citizens, over 80 percent of the public disapprove of abolishing the juvenile justice system and that considerable variation exists concerning views about the age at which adult sanctioning of youths should be allowed. Today little evidence exists that policymakers have taken the full range of public views and opinions into account. Tables, references