Legal Docket

Use the filters on the left to browse our legal docket.  For more information on race equity arguments, use this tool.

Date
51 - 60 of 449 resultsReset
Keeping Kids in the Community

In re M.P.

Maryland Court of Appeals •
The brief argued that Maryland’s Juvenile Justice Reform Commission recommended a minimum age because it recognized that the juvenile justice system is a developmentally inappropriate response to alleged misbehavior by young children. The brief further argued that the approach of sister states reflects a national trend of setting a minimum age of juvenile court jurisdiction, and that racial and gender equity considerations reinforce the need for retroactive application of the JJRA.
Keeping Kids in the Community

In re N.E.M.

Pennsylvania Supreme Court •
Our brief argued that the Superior Court and juvenile court orders contravene the letter and purpose of Pennsylvania’s Juvenile Act and related court rules. We further argued that meaningful and timely appellate review is necessary to curtail the grave harms caused by out-of-home placements, including disproportionate harm to youth of color and youth with disabilities.
Keeping Kids in the Community

City of Philadelphia v. Department of Human Services

Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court •
Our brief argued that the current overcrowding at PJJSC will continue unless measures are taken to substantially limit the use of custody and confinement for Philadelphia’s youth. Our brief emphasized the many ways that out-of-home placements cause grave harm to children. We further argued that Pennsylvania’s overuse of confinement disproportionately harms youth of color and youth with disabilities, and that alternatives to detention are available and effective.
Youth Interrogations & Access to Counsel

O.W. v. Carr

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit •
Our brief argued that the increased presence of law enforcement in schools leads to greater juvenile and criminal system involvement for youth and disproportionately affects Black youth. We further argued that O.W. was entitled to Fifth Amendment protections during questioning.
Youth Interrogations & Access to Counsel

State v. Hauschultz

Wisconsin Courts of Appeal •
Our brief argued that Damian’s age and trauma history made his interrogations unconstitutional. Our brief further emphasized the ways that adolescent brain development impacts youths’ abilities to appreciate and enforce their rights during interrogations, and how trauma compounds adolescent vulnerabilities during interrogations. 
Economic Justice

Freeman v. County of Riverside

Our declaration detailed the financial and emotional harms to children and families of collecting costs of support and detention fees. We further emphasized that collecting these fees amplifies existing racial and income inequity in the juvenile legal system and disproportionately harms youth of color and very low-income youth. 
Keeping Kids in the Community

Muth v. Voe

Texas Court of Appeals •
The brief argued that DFPS investigations, even those that do not lead to family separation or court involvement, cause harm to Texas families. The brief argued that increased surveillance of families by child welfare systems does not lead to better outcomes for children and emphasized the many harms of family separation and child welfare system involvement to children. The brief further emphasized that the new directive will disproportionately harm transgender youth as well as communities that already face high rates of investigation and involvement, including families experiencing poverty, families of color, and parents with disabilities.