Maryland's Juvenile Justice Overhaul
By Darius Spearman (africanelements)
Support African Elements at patreon.com/africanelements and hear recent news in a single playlist. Additionally, you can gain early access to ad-free video content.
New Ankle Monitoring Rules
The Maryland Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) has made big changes to how it handles young people in the justice system. These new rules, which started on July 3, focus on electronic ankle monitoring. They mean that if a young person commits another crime while wearing an ankle monitor, they will be held in detention automatically until their next court hearing (baltimoresun.com). This is a significant shift that aims to increase accountability.
Betsy Fox Tolentino, the Acting Secretary for DJS, explained that while detention will be used in some cases, it is part of a larger plan. This plan includes different types of support and interventions to help young people. The goal is to ensure they receive the help they need, not just punishment (wordinblack.com). Furthermore, the law has been updated to include more serious offenses. These include crimes involving handguns, severe animal cruelty, and certain sex offenses. Young people who commit a felony will also be required to have automatic GPS monitoring (wbal.com).
Debate Over Policy Changes
These new DJS policies have caused a lot of discussion. Some people believe stricter rules are needed. Others worry about the harm these rules could cause, especially to Black and Brown youth, and that they might lead to more young people being locked up. For instance, the arrest of a 13-year-old with 18 felony charges while wearing an ankle monitor brought these frustrations to light (foxbaltimore.com). This case became a symbol for those who feel the current system is not working for repeat young offenders.
Jason Johnson, a former Baltimore City Police Deputy Commissioner, strongly believes that juvenile detention facilities are necessary. He called the 13-year-old's case a “poster child” for someone who needs to be detained (foxbaltimore.com). However, civil rights advocates like Matt Parsons from the Baltimore Action Legal Team see things differently. They argue that these policies strengthen systems that are already unfair and based on racial injustice. They believe these rules will hurt Black and Brown youth the most (wordinblack.com). Parsons also worries that the idea of “innocent until proven guilty” is being lost. This is because young people who are re-arrested while on a monitor will be held in detention until their court date, regardless of whether they are guilty (wordinblack.com).
Concerns About “Adultification”
Critics argue that these new policies do not support the healthy development of young people. They fear these rules could lead to the “adultification” and marginalization of Black youth. Iman Freeman, Executive Director at the Baltimore Action Legal Team, questioned the state's true goals. She stated that there is no evidence to show these policies help young people thrive. Instead, she believes they are about pushing young people to the side, not supporting them (wordinblack.com).
Freeman also pointed out that these new policies continue a long history of treating Black youth like criminals. She explained that the “adultification” of Black youth makes it harder to see them as children. This can lead to harsher punishments and increased surveillance, rather than giving them the support they need (wordinblack.com). This bias can lead to more arrests, detentions, and harsher sentences for Black youth. Their childhood is often denied, and they are held to adult standards of responsibility. This is a serious concern for many advocates.
Understanding Adultification of Black Youth
Adultification of Black Youth: This is when Black children are seen and treated as older and more responsible than they actually are. This can lead to harsher punishments and increased surveillance in the justice system, denying them their childhood and holding them to adult standards.
Electronic Ankle Monitoring Explained
Electronic ankle monitoring, also known as electronic monitoring or EM, involves attaching a device to a person's ankle. This device tracks their location and makes sure they follow the rules of their supervision. In juvenile supervision, its main purpose is to offer an alternative to being held in detention. This allows young people to stay in their communities while still being watched by authorities (bostonglobe.com). The technology usually uses GPS or radio signals to send location data to a monitoring center. This center then alerts officials if there are any violations, such as breaking curfew or going into forbidden areas.
The idea of “alternatives to detention” is a key part of juvenile justice reform. Electronic monitoring is a tool used to help young people stay in their communities instead of being incarcerated (vera.org). The Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative (JDAI) aims to lower the number of young people in detention. Electronic monitoring is a common way to supervise youth in less restrictive settings, supporting this goal (francoangeli.it). Despite these benefits, there have been “failures in monitoring youth on ankle monitors,” which highlights challenges in how this system is managed (bostonglobe.com).
Understanding Detention-Eligible Offenses
A “detention-eligible offense” refers to specific types of alleged crimes that automatically qualify a young person for detention until their next court hearing. This happens instead of allowing them to be released. While the details of these offenses are not always clearly listed, they are considered serious enough by policy to warrant immediate removal from the community (bostonglobe.com). For example, pretrial detentions increased by 17 percent last year, and many of these were for misdemeanor charges that were later dismissed (bostonglobe.com). This shows that even less severe offenses can lead to automatic detention under certain policies.
The discussion around “automatic detention until hearing” means that certain offenses trigger this immediate detention. This makes them “detention-eligible” (bostonglobe.com). This policy raises concerns about the presumption of innocence, as young people are held in custody based on an accusation before any formal decision is made about their case. This shifts the burden onto the young person to prove their innocence, rather than the state proving their guilt (bostonglobe.com). Only 14 percent of pretrial detentions happened because a child was found too dangerous to release, which further suggests that many detentions are not based on a judicial finding of risk (bostonglobe.com).
Pretrial Detention Statistics
The Role of Credible Messengers
“Credible messengers” are individuals who often have personal experience with the justice system or come from the same communities as the young people they work with. They are hired to guide, mentor, and support youth who are involved in or at risk of being involved with the juvenile justice system. Their credibility comes from their ability to connect with young people's experiences, build trust, and offer real guidance (vera.org). In juvenile justice, their role is very important in diversion programs. They help steer young people away from further criminal activity, connect them with resources, and encourage positive changes through mentorship and support.
The mention of “community-based alternatives to detention” and “diversion programs” suggests that these programs involve people who can effectively work with youth outside of traditional institutions. This is a key part of what credible messengers do (vera.org). The Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative (JDAI) focuses on rehabilitation and community-based solutions. This aligns with the approach of credible messengers who support youth within their own communities (francoangeli.it). These messengers are vital for helping young people find better paths and avoid further involvement with the justice system.
Broader System of Interventions
A “broader system of interventions” in juvenile justice includes a variety of programs and services. These are designed to address the root causes of bad behavior, encourage rehabilitation, and ensure accountability without relying only on detention. These interventions can include community-based programs, mental health and substance abuse counseling, educational support, job training, family therapy, and restorative justice practices (vera.org). The main goal is to provide specific support that helps young people develop good behaviors, connect with positive influences, and successfully return to their communities. This helps reduce repeat offenses and promotes long-term well-being.
The discussion of “a continuum of community-based alternatives to detention” shows that these are important parts of a broader system. This system aims to support youth outside of secure facilities (vera.org). The Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative (JDAI) focuses on reducing the number of young people in detention and ensuring a “rehabilitation-oriented process.” This means there is a need for a wider system of support beyond just locking them up (francoangeli.it). Sacramento County's involvement in “Performance-Based Standards” for juvenile facilities, which includes working with the Office of Education, Department of Health and Human Services, and Behavioral Health Services, shows a multi-faceted approach to helping young people and keeping the public safe (saccoprobation.saccounty.gov).
New Programs for Youth Support
DJS is also putting new programs in place to support young people in the system and connect them with services in their communities. One new program is called CARE (Community Assistance for the Release Eligible). This program is for young people who are not in detention or on community detention. It aims to support families and provide referrals to various services (foxbaltimore.com). This shows a commitment to helping young people stay out of detention and get the help they need.
Another program, the Detention Diversion Advocacy Program, will also support young people in the community. This program is for those ordered by the court to receive support from “credible messengers” (foxbaltimore.com). These community-based programs are crucial alternatives to traditional detention. They aim to provide comprehensive support, including counseling, educational assistance, mentorship, and family services. However, specific details about eligibility, the full range of services, and how success is measured for these programs are not widely available (vera.org).
Key Areas of Intervention
Impact on Racial Disparities
Concerns about “racial harm” and the “adultification” of Black youth are often brought up when discussing juvenile justice policies. This suggests that racial disparities are a major problem. However, there is not much specific data or evidence to show how new policies, like automatic detention, have affected racial disparities. This includes differences in detention rates, how long young people stay in detention, or how often they reoffend among different racial and ethnic groups (bostonglobe.com). Without this data, it is hard to truly understand how much these policies make existing disparities worse or better.
The fact that “racial harm concerns are raised” about the new policies clearly shows that people are aware of how these rules might unfairly affect different racial groups (bostonglobe.com). The criticism about the “adultification” of Black youth also points to deep-seated biases that contribute to these racial disparities within the juvenile justice system. This lack of clear data makes it difficult to fully evaluate the impact of these policies on our communities.
Effectiveness of New Policies
There are ongoing debates about whether new juvenile justice policies, especially those with stricter detention measures, are actually effective. However, there is little hard evidence, such as rates of reoffending, educational success, or mental health outcomes, to show if these new policies truly reduce crime or lead to better long-term results for young people. Without this kind of data, it is tough to say for sure if stricter detention achieves its goals of keeping the public safe and helping young people get back on track (bostonglobe.com).
The number of young people in detention continued to rise even as the total number of cases stayed about the same last year (bostonglobe.com). This raises questions about whether more detention is actually helping to solve the underlying issues or reduce overall youth involvement in the justice system. The Juvenile Detention Alternative Initiative (JDAI) aims to lower the number of young people in detention. This suggests that success is often measured by reducing the need for detention, rather than increasing it (francoangeli.it). The success of JDAI in New Jersey as a “Model State” shows that alternatives to detention can be effective, which contrasts with policies that increase detention.
Reasons for Pretrial Detentions
Monitoring and Enforcement Challenges
The reports mention “failures in monitoring youth on ankle monitors,” which points to problems with the current system. However, they do not explain how electronic monitoring is actually done. This includes details about the technology used, how often checks are made, what happens when alerts go off, or how many staff members are involved. This lack of information makes it hard to understand the day-to-day operations of the monitoring system (bostonglobe.com).
Furthermore, the articles do not go into detail about the specific challenges faced in monitoring. These challenges could include technical glitches, not enough staff, or young people trying to tamper with the devices. There is also no mention of any plans to improve the effectiveness and reliability of the monitoring and enforcement systems. Understanding these operational aspects would help clarify why these “failures” occur and what steps are being taken to address them.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Darius Spearman has been a professor of Black Studies at San Diego City College since 2007. He is the author of several books, including Between The Color Lines: A History of African Americans on the California Frontier Through 1890. You can visit Darius online at africanelements.org.
