Since its landmark 1967 decision of In re Gault, the Court generally has continued to expand the procedural safeguards applicable to delinquents in the adjudicatory stage of litigation, imposing many of the strictures of the Bill of Rights. In Schall, the Court upheld the constitutionality of a vague and overbroad preventive detention statute that contained no specific guidelines for application, despite evidence that the New York law was being used to punish children prior to an adjudication of guilt. It was held that the legislation, which permitted up to 17 days' detention if the child was viewed as presenting a serious risk of committing a crime before trial, served a legitimate State objective, did not impose punishment, and provided sufficient due process protection against unnecessary and erroneous deprivation of liberty. Emphasizing that fundamental fairness was the transcending criterion, the Court subordinated the juvenile's liberty interest to the State's parens patriae authority by resurrecting the children-are-always-in-custody argument of pre-Gault days. Although Schall ostensibly is limited to the context of the juvenile justice system, the Court's findings that crime justice system, the Court's findings that crime prevention is a legitimate and compelling State interest and that prediction of criminality is permissible may have implications for the rights of adults charged with crimes as well. A total of 148 footnotes are included.