Home / Publications / NCJRS Abstract

PUBLICATIONS

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

NCJ Number:	165985

Title:	In re Gault et al.: Supreme Court of the United States (From Exploring Delinquency: Causes and Control, P 22-28, 1996, Dean G Rojek and Gary F Jensen, eds. -- See NCJ-165981)

Editor(s):	D G Rojek; G F Jensen

Date Published:	1996

Page Count:	7

Sponsoring Agency:	Roxbury Publishing Co. Los Angeles, CA 90049-9044

Sale Source:	Roxbury Publishing Co. P.O. Box 491044 Los Angeles, CA 90049-9044 United States of America

Type:	Legislation/Policy Description

Language:	English

Country:	United States of America

Annotation:	This paper presents excerpts from the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on the processing of juvenile Gerald Gault (1967), which stated that juveniles have a right to due process of law.

Abstract:	Justice Fortas, who wrote the opinion, delivered an indictment of the juvenile court when he stated, "Under our Constitution, the condition of being a boy does not justify a kangaroo court." Many of the basic rights that are taken for granted in the adult court were not granted to Gault, such as the right to counsel, the right to confront witnesses, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to cross-examine witnesses. Justices Harlan and Stewart did not agree with the other members of the Court. Justice Harlan stated that "the Court has gone too far," and Justice Stewart argued that "the Court's decision is wholly unsound as a matter of constitutional law, and sadly unwise as a matter of judicial policy." In a concurring opinion, however, Justice Black stated that "Where a person, infant or adult, can be seized by the State, charged, and convicted for violating a State criminal law, and then ordered by the State to be confined for 6 years, I think the Constitution requires that he be tried in accordance with the guarantees of all the provisions of the Bill of Rights made applicable to the States by the Fourteenth Amendment."

Main Term(s):	Juvenile court procedures

Index Term(s):	Juvenile processing; Right to Due Process; Rights of minors; US Supreme Court decisions



	To cite this abstract, use the following link: http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=165985

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.

PUBLICATIONS

NCJRS Abstract

Find in a Library