NCJ Number
128945
Journal
Journal Volume: 76 Dated: (October 1990) Pages: 50,52,54,56
Date Published
1990
Length
4 pages
Annotation
The U.S. Supreme Court has extended some constitutional guarantees in their entirety to minors, while trimming back others to accommodate perceived interests of parents, families, and the State to act on behalf of minors.
Abstract
Applying the Constitution to situations involving children has generated line drawing which often seems to flow more from each justice's experiences and social views than from constitutional text and doctrine. With respect to eighth amendment protection against cruel and unusual punishment, for example, the Supreme Court found no violation when 16-year-olds are executed, but did find such a violation in executing 15-year-olds. In two widely reported cases, the Supreme Court ruled that a minor has only a limited constitutional right to an abortion. In the case of an adult defendant's right to confront child witnesses in sexual abuse cases, Justice O'Connor concluded that a State's interest in the physical and psychological well-being of child abuse victims may be sufficiently important to outweigh a defendant's right to face his or her accuser in court. Justice Scalia dissented, charging that the Supreme Court has applied interest balancing analysis not permitted by the Constitution. In another case, the Supreme Court upheld a State criminal statute barring the possession of child pornography. Justice opinions demonstrated that the same rules used in the adult criminal justice system do not always apply to juvenile justice. A law professor indicates that children's cases become vehicles for larger conflicts because children are sympathetic victims, and both issue activists and prosecutors may use natural sympathies for children to achieve their broader agendas.