Includes bibliographical references (p. 233-237) and index.
Contents:
The state supreme court's decision: the government must protect children / John Bannister Gibson -- Ex parte Crouse paved the way for juvenile institutions that were less than ideal / Alexander W. Pisciotta -- The notion of parens patriae promotes gender bias in the juvenile justice system / Randall G. Shelden -- The juvenile court system protects children's rights / Raymond E. Chao -- The court's decision: the due process clause applies to minors tried in juvenile court / Abe Fortas -- Dissenting opinion: juvenile proceedings are not criminal trials and should not impose the same restrictions / Potter Stewart -- In re Gault led to transferring of juveniles to adult criminal courts / Enrico Pagnanelli -- Although In re Gault protects due process, it does not protect the interests of children / Emily Buss -- After In re Gault, juveniles are still underrepresented by attorneys in proceedings / N. Lee Cooper, Patricia Puritz, and Wendy Shang -- The court's decision: when searching students on school grounds, school officials do not violate juveniles' right to privacy / Byron R. White -- Court opinion, dissenting in part: students' fourth amendment expectations to privacy must be protected against unreasonable search and seizure / John Paul Stevens -- The expansion of police power in schools diminishes the rights of students / Randall R. Beger -- Random school searches ensure safety and are constitutional / Mitchell L. Yell and Michael E. Rozalski -- Teachers should not conduct student searches / Nicole Klaas -- School violence has not negatively affected students' civil liberties / Mario S. Torres Jr. and Yihsuan Chen -- The court's decision: standards of decency insist that the death penalty for juveniles constitutes cruel and unusual punishment / Anthony M. Kennedy -- Dissenting opinion: the death penalty should apply to juveniles / Sandra Day O'Connor -- Juveniles should not be tried in adult criminal court / Ellen Marrus and Irene Merker Rosenberg -- The effect of Roper v. Simmons on death penalty cases is trivial / David R. Dow -- Roper v. Simmons opens the door to death penalty exemptions for the mentally ill / Helen Shin -- Roper v. Simmons may lead to arguments that life in prison without parole is cruel and unusual punishment / Mark Hansen.
This resource is supported by the Institute of Museum and Library Services under the provisions of the Library Services and Technology Act as administered by State Library of Iowa.