Juvenile or adult? Negotiating and contesting childhood in the courtroom

• Legal actors negotiate the “adult” and “juvenile” labels in the criminal court.
• The distribution of power shapes negotiations and contestations over these labels.
• The organizational context also shapes these negotiations and contestations.
• Legal rules and procedures are important, but are filtered by power and place.

Legislative changes during the 1980s and 1990s made it easier to treat juveniles as adults in the U.S. justice system. Research on the sentencing outcomes of juveniles in the criminal court has been somewhat mixed, with some studies showing that they receive severe or long sentences and others showing that many young people receive probation or relatively short jail or prison sentences. Less attention has been placed on the process through which these cases move through the criminal court and the ways in which the labels of “juvenile” and “adult” are negotiated and contested by legal actors. Using both qualitative and quantitative data, this article examines the negotiation of these labels. While it finds that legal rules are important in establishing the potential outcomes in a case, the power of specific actors and the context of specific courtrooms are also important in shaping the negotiations and contestations over these labels. The article provides a framework to understand outcomes and presents ways that advocates can become involved in helping to shape the outcomes of these cases.