# data[].attributes.body
Juveniles being tried as adults is the legal practice of prosecuting individuals under the age of 18 in adult criminal courts rather than in juvenile courts. This typically occurs in cases involving serious crimes such as murder, sexual assault, or armed robbery. The rationale is often based on the severity of the offense, the minor’s criminal history, or the belief that the juvenile justice system is inadequate for certain cases. I included this in my pallet because I personally believe that minors should not be tried in adult court and it's something that I had never really thought about but it interests me.

Being placed in adult prisons exposes young offenders to greater risks which can lead to worse outcomes and higher rates of reoffending.

Juveniles tried as adults often face adult sentences which focus more on punishment than rehabilitation which reduce their chances of reform and successful reintegration into society.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Despite the establishment of a separate juvenile justice system over a century ago, youth are routinely charged and prosecuted in the adult criminal justice system. The numbers of youth facing adult prosecution increased substantially in the 1990's in the wake of a baseless and racist myth that a generation of "super-predators" was on the rise. While crime has steadily decreased since that time, these laws continue to subject youth to criminal conviction and sentencing.

Adolescent Development and The Law

Scientific research shows key developmental differences between youth and adults that impact youth's decision making, impulse control, and susceptibility to peer pressure. While these differences do not excuse youth from responsibility for their actions, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized that youth are less blameworthy than adults and more capable of change and rehabilitation (Roper v. Simmons, Graham v. Florida, J.D.B. v. North Carolina, Miller v. Alabama, Montgomery v. Louisiana).

Punishing children the same way we punish adults does not advance public safety. Research also shows that as youth mature, they are substantially less likely to re-offend; locking children up for years will extend their incarceration well beyond the time needed for them to be rehabilitated.

Prosecuting Youth as Adults Puts Them At Risk

Many youth in the justice system have experienced or witnessed violence and trauma. Youth in the adult criminal justice system face a higher risk of sexual abuse, physical assault, and suicide. Incarcerating children with adults also denies them access to many essential programs and services, including basic and special education, as well as treatment and counseling services, impeding their chances for healthy development. Education is also closely linked to reducing re-offending; youth's successful re-entry to their communities is compromised when they are deprived of adequate and appropriate educational opportunities.

Juvenile Law Center opposes the treatment of youth as adults; the juvenile justice system, designed to emphasize rehabilitation over punishment, is better suited to meet youth's needs. When youth face possible involvement in the adult system, we advocate for adequate due process, including ensuring that the decision is made by a judge following a full and proper hearing, and with the opportunity to appeal.

Images: © Richard Ross, juvenile-in-justice.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Youth Tried as Adults | Juvenile Law Center

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Despite the establishment of a separate juvenile justice system over a century ago, youth are routinely charged and prosecuted in the adult criminal justice system. The numbers of youth facing adult prosecution increased substantially in the 1990's in the wake of a baseless and racist myth that a generation of "super-predators" was on the rise.

# data[].attributes.body
U.S. immigration laws regulate who can enter, live, work, and become a citizen. They cover visas, green cards, citizenship, and deportation. The system is complex and often debated, especially around border security, undocumented immigrants, and asylum seekers. I included this in my pallet because there is a lot of controversy on this topic right now, and as someone whose parents are both immigrants I think there needs to be more understanding from the government.

The system can be unfair and overly complicated making it hard for good hardworking people to navigate or feel fully accepted, even after contributing to the country.

The political debate often ignores real immigrant stories, turning immigration into a controversy instead of recognizing the value and sacrifices immigrant families bring to the U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Diana Roy and Claire Klobucista and Amelia Cheatham

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The U.S. Immigration Debate | Council on Foreign Relations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Comprehensive immigration reform has eluded Congress for decades. Presidents have increasingly turned to executive action to reshape asylum and border policy.

# data[].attributes.body
Climate change is the ongoing change in Earth’s climate, largely driven by human activities such as burning coal, oil, and gas. These actions release greenhouse gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, leading to rising global temperatures, shifting weather patterns, stronger storms, and threats to both nature and human communities. I included this in my pallet because this is a topic i'm super passionate about defending and some people don't think it's that important to learn about when it is.

Human activity is the main driver, especially through the use of fossil fuels that release heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.

Climate change affects everyone which leads to more extreme weather, rising sea levels, and environmental disruptions that impact health, safety, and the economy worldwide.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We often think about human-induced climate change as something that will happen in the future, but it is happening now. Ecosystems and people in the United States and around the world are affected by the ongoing process of climate change today.

# data[].attributes.body
Gun control in America refers to the laws and policies that regulate the sale, ownership, and use of firearms. It’s a highly debated issue, with some pushing for stricter laws to reduce gun violence, while others argue for the protection of Second Amendment rights. The debate centers around finding a balance between public safety and individual freedom. I included this in my padlet because I personally will never own a gun and it's such a controversial issue and one that I find super interesting.

Different states have varying laws, which creates a patchwork of regulations that can make enforcement and consistency challenging.

Cultural and political divides heavily influence the debate, with gun control often tied to broader discussions about identity, freedom, and government trust.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Guns are deeply ingrained in American society and the nation's political debates.

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms, and about a third of U.S. adults say they personally own a gun. At the same time, in response to concerns such as rising gun death rates and mass shootings, the U.S. surgeon general has taken the unprecedented step of declaring gun violence a public health crisis.

Here are some key findings about Americans' views of gun ownership, gun policy and other subjects, drawn from Pew Research Center surveys.

About four-in-ten U.S. adults say they live in a household with a gun, including 32% who say they personally own one, according to a Center survey conducted in June 2023. These numbers are virtually unchanged since the last time we asked this question in 2021.

There are differences in gun ownership rates by political affiliation, gender, community type and other factors.

Party: 45% of Republicans and GOP-leaning independents say they personally own a gun, compared with 20% of Democrats and Democratic leaners.

Gender: 40% of men say they own a gun, versus 25% of women.

Community type: 47% of adults living in rural areas report owning a firearm, as do smaller shares of those who live in suburbs (30%) or urban areas (20%).

Race and ethnicity: 38% of White Americans own a gun, compared with smaller shares of Black (24%), Hispanic (20%) and Asian (10%) Americans.

Personal protection tops the list of reasons gun owners give for having a firearm. About seven-in-ten gun owners (72%) say protection is a major reason they own a gun. Considerably smaller shares say that a major reason they own a gun is for hunting (32%), for sport shooting (30%), as part of a gun collection (15%) or for their job (7%).

Americans' reasons behind gun ownership have changed only modestly since we fielded a separate survey about these topics in spring 2017. At that time, 67% of gun owners cited protection as a major reason they had a firearm.

Gun owners tend to have much more positive feelings about having a gun in the house than nonowners who live with them do. For instance, 71% of gun owners say they enjoy owning a gun - but just 31% of nonowners living in a household with a gun say they enjoy having one in the home. And while 81% of gun owners say owning a gun makes them feel safer, a narrower majority of nonowners in gun households (57%) say the same. Nonowners are also more likely than owners to worry about having a gun at home (27% vs. 12%).

Feelings about gun ownership also differ by political affiliation, even among those who personally own a firearm. Republican gun owners are more likely than Democratic owners to say owning one gives them feelings of safety and enjoyment, while Democratic owners are more likely to say they worry about having a gun in the home.

Non-gun owners are split on whether they see themselves owning a firearm in the future. About half of Americans who don't own a gun (52%) say they could never see themselves owning one, while nearly as many (47%) could imagine themselves as gun owners in the future.

Among those who currently do not own a gun, attitudes about owning one in the future differ by party and other factors.

Party: 61% of Republicans who don't own a gun say they could see themselves owning one in the future, compared with 40% of Democrats.

Gender: 56% of men who don't own a gun say they could see themselves owning one someday; 40% of women nonowners say the same.

Race and ethnicity: 56% of Black nonowners say they could see themselves owning a gun one day, compared with smaller shares of White (48%), Hispanic (40%) and Asian (38%) nonowners.

A majority of Americans (61%) say it is too easy to legally obtain a gun in this country, according to the June 2023 survey. Far fewer (9%) say it is too hard, while another 30% say it's about right.

Non-gun owners are nearly twice as likely as gun owners to say it is too easy to legally obtain a gun (73% vs. 38%). Gun owners, in turn, are more than twice as likely as nonowners to say the ease of obtaining a gun is about right (48% vs. 20%).

There are differences by party and community type on this question, too. While 86% of Democrats say it is too easy to obtain a gun legally, far fewer Republicans (34%) say the same. Most urban (72%) and suburban (63%) residents say it's too easy to legally obtain a gun, but rural residents are more divided: 47% say it is too easy, 41% say it is about right and 11% say it is too hard.

About six-in-ten U.S. adults (58%) favor stricter gun laws. Another 26% say that U.S. gun laws are about right, while 15% favor less strict gun laws.

There is broad partisan agreement on some gun policy proposals, but most are politically divisive. Majorities of U.S. adults in both partisan coalitions somewhat or strongly favor two policies that would restrict gun access: preventing those with mental illnesses from purchasing guns (88% of Republicans and 89% of Democrats support this) and increasing the minimum age for buying guns to 21 years old (69% of Republicans, 90% of Democrats). Majorities in both parties also oppose allowing people to carry concealed firearms without a permit (60% of Republicans and 91% of Democrats oppose this).

Republicans and Democrats differ on several other proposals. While 85% of Democrats favor banning both assault-style weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, majorities of Republicans oppose these proposals (57% and 54%, respectively).

Most Republicans, on the other hand, support allowing teachers and school officials to carry guns in K-12 schools (74%) and allowing people to carry concealed guns in more places (71%). These proposals are supported by just 27% and 19% of Democrats, respectively.

The public remains closely divided over whether it's more important to protect gun rights or control gun ownership, according to an April 2024 survey. Overall, 51% of U.S. adults say it's more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, while a similar share (48%) say controlling gun ownership is more important.

Views have shifted slightly since 2022, when we last asked this question. That year, 47% of adults prioritized protecting Americans' rights to own guns, while 52% said controlling gun ownership was more important.

Views on this topic differ sharply by party. In the most recent survey, 83% of Republicans say protecting gun rights is more important, while 79% of Democrats prioritize controlling gun ownership.

Americans are slightly more likely to say gun ownership does more to increase safety than to decrease it. Around half of Americans (52%) say gun ownership does more to increase safety by allowing law-abiding citizens to protect themselves, while a slightly smaller share (47%) say gun ownership does more to reduce safety by giving too many people access to firearms and increasing misuse. Views were evenly divided (49% vs. 49%) when we last asked in 2023.

Republicans and Democrats differ widely on this question: 81% of Republicans say gun ownership does more to increase safety, while 74% of Democrats say it does more to reduce safety.

Rural and urban Americans also have starkly different views. Among adults who live in rural areas, 64% say gun ownership increases safety, while among those in urban areas, 57% say it reduces safety. Those living in the suburbs are about evenly split in their views.

More than half of U.S. adults say an increase in the number of guns in the country is bad for society, according to the April 2024 survey. Some 54% say, generally, this is very or somewhat bad for society. Another 21% say it is very or somewhat good for society, and a quarter say it is neither good nor bad for society.

About half of Americans (49%) see gun violence as a major problem, according to a May 2024 survey. This is down from 60% in June 2023, but roughly on par with views in previous years. In the more recent survey, 27% say gun violence is a moderately big problem, and about a quarter say it is either a small problem (19%) or not a problem at all (4%).

A majority of public K-12 teachers (59%) say they are at least somewhat worried about the possibility of a shooting ever happening at their school, including 18% who are very or extremely worried, according to a fall 2023 Center survey of teachers. A smaller share of teachers (39%) say they are not too or not at all worried about a shooting occurring at their school.

School shootings are a concern for K-12 parents as well: 32% say they are very or extremely worried about a shooting ever happening at their children's school, while 37% are somewhat worried, according to a fall 2022 Center survey of parents with at least one child younger than 18 who is not homeschooled. Another 31% of K-12 parents say they are not too or not at all worried about this.

Note: This is an update of a post originally published on Jan. 5, 2016.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About six-in-ten U.S. adults (58%) favor stricter gun laws. Another 26% say that U.S. gun laws are about right, while 15% favor less strict gun laws.

# data[].attributes.body
Mental health in the American legal system refers to how individuals with mental illnesses are identified, treated, and managed within courts, jails, and prisons. Many people with mental health issues end up involved in the legal system due to a lack of adequate healthcare and support. The system faces challenges in providing proper treatment, often leading to overcrowded prisons and repeated arrests instead of rehabilitation. I included this in my padlet because it's a topic I hadn't ever really thought about before but it interests me.

Many individuals with mental health issues end up in the legal system because of limited access to proper healthcare and support outside of it.

The legal system often struggles to provide effective treatment, resulting in repeated arrests and overcrowded jails instead of focusing on rehabilitation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Recently, I was having a conversation with a friend, and she brought up a story she heard on the news. A man who was believed to have a mental health condition was recently released from prison; soon after, he was rearrested for a crime similar to his first offense. My friend concluded that he never should have been released in the first place. A few years ago, I might have thought the same thing. Now, unfortunately, I've found myself with a front row seat to what it really means to be incarcerated.

Many believe that if someone released from prison is rearrested, they were probably not incarcerated long enough. Accordingly, recidivism is a major concern for Departments of Corrections (DOCs).

In Connecticut, where I live, the DOC describes itself as, "striving to be a leader in progressive and partnered re-entry initiatives to support responsive evidence-based practices geared toward supporting reintegration and reducing recidivism." The department, however, does not appear to be achieving this goal; the most recent documented recidivism rate is 79%.

This failure is not surprising to me, based on my experience with my son who is incarcerated in the state. He was a senior in high school and experienced an acute episode of psychosis. Despite the fact that he has not been found guilty of a crime, he has spent the last four years languishing, without any productive uses for his time, in a cell the size of a parking space.

Recovery for SMI is possible with timely, meaningful treatment. But we cannot expect to make progress when we keep those in a mental health crisis in dehumanizing environments that exacerbate their symptoms. I believe my home state's flawed system perpetuates the revolving door of our correctional facilities. If the system is unable to address the unique needs of someone with SMI, how can the DOC ensure successful reintegration back into our communities?

My Son's Experience with DOC Mental Health Care

Of Connecticut's incarcerated population, 5.5% (including my son) has been classified as a Mental Health (MH) level of 4 or 5, meaning they have treatment needs at a severe or crisis level. However, the current facilities are not equipped to provide the level of services he needs (they are also poorly equipped to provide care for lower levels).

The DOC employs mental health counselors - many of whom are empathetic, attentive and well meaning, but also have limited training. For example, they are not trained to offer Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) for someone with psychosis or trained in understanding anosognosia, a lack of awareness of one's mental health condition.

Additionally, the mental staff they do have is severely overworked and understaffed. There is a high rate of turnover in medication prescribers- my child is on his fourth provider. After years of incarceration, he was finally seen by an Advanced Practice Registered Nurse (APRN), his third prescriber, who put him on an effective medication regimen including an anti-psychotic that has been beneficial. She has since resigned.

Thankfully, my son is still on the medication regimen and responding well. However, working against the medication are the traumatizing aspects of prison and the imposed inability to use his mind or body in a productive way. The facility provides no space to exercise, and he is not permitted to go outdoors in the winter months, so he has no access to daylight. There are occasional vocational courses offered (that come with long wait lists), however, my son is ineligible for a college course solely because he's in a mental health unit. The food is filled with additives and lacks any nutrition. So, while the medication improves his illness, every other aspect of his environment exacerbates it.

My Son's Experience, Sadly, is Not Unique

Due to closures of mental health hospitals, prisons are now housing more and more people with mental illness. According to the Connecticut Memo on Mental Health, in May of 2020 in Connecticut, 28% of the prison population was deemed to have an active mental illness requiring treatment. By January 2022, this number climbed to 32%. In the U.S., those living with SMI are 10 times more likely to end up in prison than in a hospital. In fact, America's three largest mental health facilities are prisons.

Our prison system is an unnerving environment in which people seem to exist in a constant state of fight or flight. This frightening situation is compounded by mental illness symptoms, like psychosis, which causes confusion about what's real, leaving incarcerated people with mental illness even more vulnerable. This struggle is even more disconcerting when existing in a space about the size of a bathroom where the most basic necessities - like a spork to eat or a pillow to rest your head - can be difficult to access.

Through my experience with my son, I have met dedicated mental health providers in our prison system. However, they are severely under-resourced, and they are forced to focus solely on symptom management rather than recovery. It is not surprising, then, that people with SMI serve longer sentences for the same crimes as those without mental health conditions. For my child in prison, being brought to the "infirmary" has meant demoralizing strip searches and isolation for 23 hours a day. This is how mental illness is "managed" during a crisis.

We Must Make Changes

Prisons need to escalate their mental health services to be aimed at recovery, not maintenance for people who are living in anguish. Corrections officers should have training to appropriately recognize and address people in crisis. Modalities beyond medication and counseling that can aide in healing should be available, like meditation, education, exposure to daylight, exercise and nutritious food.

When it comes to recidivism for those with mental illness, it's not the person who is the problem; rather, the person has a problem, an illness, that has only been made worse by incarceration. Consider that nationally about 95% of people incarcerated are released back into their communities. If we truly want to make our communities safer, we must do better to ensure people come home healthy and well prepared to reintegrate - not sick or stuck in a state of hopelessness.

My son is now in his fourth year of waiting to have his case adjudicated. He is still unsentenced. He has not been found guilty of a crime, yet his right to wellness has been revoked. He has been living in dehumanizing conditions waiting to move his case through the court system.

This process has only added to the collateral damage of his first episode of psychosis. There is no consideration of what's at stake to his health as we wait to have his case adjudicated. And every day, we wait for him to receive meaningful treatment is another day that pulls him from the possibility of ever having a healthy, fulfilling life.
Denise Paley is on the Connecticut State Advisory Board for the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services and is a Board Member of NAMI Shoreline. She is a mental health and prison reform advocate, frequently testifying for laws to improve prison conditions in Connecticut. and have been testifying for laws to improve conditions here in CT.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NAMI, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, is the nation's largest grassroots mental health organization dedicated to building better lives for the millions of Americans affected by mental illness.

# data[].attributes.body
Cash bail in America is a system where individuals accused of a crime must pay money to be released from jail while awaiting their court date. The amount is meant to ensure they return for trial. Critics argue it unfairly impacts low-income people who can’t afford bail, leading to unnecessary jail time before conviction. I added this to my padlet because I think that it's unfair for someone to have a high bail when they can't afford it and I also think that it just allows the rich to get away with things more easily and it's something that should be talked about more.

Cash bail can create inequality, as low-income individuals may stay in jail simply because they can’t afford to pay, even if they haven’t been convicted.

The system can lead to unnecessary jail time, increasing personal and financial hardship and contributing to overcrowded jails.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Smart Justice - Ending cash bail - ACLU of Pennsylvania

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Cash bail leads to wealth-based detention Jailing people because they can not afford to post money bail amounts to wealth-based detention that violates well-established norms of fairness and constitutional principles.‍One of the most basic principles underlying our criminal justice system is the presumption of innocence: that one is “innocent until proven guilty.” Keeping people in jail […]

# data[].attributes.body
The death penalty in America is a legal punishment where certain convicted criminals can be sentenced to execution. It is used mainly for severe crimes like murder. The practice is controversial, with debates over its morality, fairness, risk of wrongful convictions, and its effectiveness as a deterrent to crime. Some states have abolished it, while others continue to enforce it. I included this in my padlet because I know it's an issue that has caused controversy but it's a topic i'm interested in learning more about.

There is ongoing debate about its effectiveness as a deterrent to serious crime, with no clear consensus on whether it actually reduces crime rates.

The cost of death penalty cases is often higher than life imprisonment due to lengthy legal processes and appeals.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Death Penalty | Equal Justice Initiative

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The death penalty in America is a failed, expensive policy, defined by bias and error.

# data[].attributes.body
The participation of transgender athletes in women’s sports in America is a highly debated topic. It centers around whether transgender women should be allowed to compete in women’s sports. I included this topic because as an athlete myself, I personally am not a huge advocate for transgender females participating in women's sports for a couple different reasons and I know it's a topic that has been debated for several years.

Scientific research on the impact of hormone therapy on athletic performance is still evolving, contributing to uncertainty in policy decisions.

The debate often highlights tensions between protecting women’s sports and respecting transgender individuals’ rights, reflecting broader societal challenges around inclusion and fairness.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to protect opportunities for women and