Challenged a provision of the PA Juvenile Act that barred Philadelphia adjudicated youth from returning to their regular public schools after they were discharged from residential delinquency placements.
Supported the position that the state must apply children’s federal insurance benefits under Title II and Title XVI in accordance with the children’s best interests and not to reduce the state’s foster care system’s financial burden.
Supreme Court held the execution of juveniles unconstitutional. Juvenile Law Center’s brief argued the developmental differences between adolescents and adults in critical areas, including impulse control and understanding consequences.
Argued that the PA Juvenile Act authorizes child welfare courts to retain jurisdiction over foster children aged 18 to 21 and to order agencies to continue to serve those youth in a course of treatment or instruction.
Argued that the court should recognize a youth’s constitutional right to a jury trial when he faces public sex offender registration upon conviction of sex offenses under Kansas’ juvenile court statute.
Juvenile Law Center’s brief argues that the mandatory sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole imposed on a 16-year-old is a disproportionate punishment under the U.S. and Massachusetts Constitutions.
Filed a "King's Bench petition" for extraordinary relief in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court seeking relief on behalf of the juveniles adjudicated by former Luzerne County juvenile court judge Mark A. Ciavarella during the "kids-for-cash" scandal.