 CurfewFrom: Dale R. ReedTo: sepschool@SepSchool.Org One of the advantages of being a member of an alliance is you never know
what memberships some of your fellow members might have. Dale
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
WASHINGTON -- In a major defeat for curfew laws aimed at keeping minors off the streets, a federal court in Washington today struck down the city's juvenile curfew law, saying that the measure violates the rights of teenagers and their parents. U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan issued a permanent injunction against the law, ruling that minors possess a fundamental right to free movement to participate in legitimate activities that do not adversely impact on the rights of others. The curfew law, he noted, would prohibit teenagers from such harmless activities as early morning sports practices or returning from a friend's home after late night studying, as well as violating the rights of parents to make responsible decisions about how to raise their own children. The American Civil Liberties Union, which brought the lawsuit on behalf of a group of minors, parents and businesses, hailed the ruling as an important victory for the rights of young people and families. This ruling makes it clear that curfew laws violate the constitutional rights of children and parents, while doing nothing to make our streets safer, said Arthur Spitzer, Legal Director of the ACLU of the National Capital Area. This is an important decision, Spitzer said, because it will send the message to cities and towns across the nation that laws punishing all juveniles are not a permissible response to the problems caused by the small fraction of juveniles who commit crimes. The proper response to juvenile crime is to arrest the criminals, not to put thousands of law-abiding young people under house arrest. The Juvenile Curfew Act of 1995, passed in July of that year, prohibited people under age 17 from being in any public place or private establishment between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. on weekdays, and between midnight at 6 a.m. on weekends. A young person's parents could also be punished for their child's curfew violations. In today's decision, Judge Sullivan carefully considered the evidence presented by the D.C. government in support of the law, and concluded that it simply did not justify the wholesale nullification of the fundamental right to move freely about for the thousands of law-abiding minors of the District. He also ruled that the evidence did not support the law's substantial intrusion into the private domain of the family and the rights of parents to make appropriate decisions for their minor children and to raise their children in a responsible manner. The case challenging the curfew law, called Hutchins v. District of Columbia, was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of the National Capital Area last November, shortly after the law went into effect. The plaintiffs in the case were eight young residents of the District of Columbia, four parents, and one local business. Robert Plotkin and other lawyers at the D.C. law firm of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker handled the case as volunteer attorneys for the ACLU. The curfew law, which was never strongly enforced, was modeled after a similar law in Dallas. Despite the lack of evidence that curfew laws are effective in crime control, many cities have recently adopted or are considering curfew laws, fueled in part by President Clinton's announced support for curfew laws earlier this year. But as 16-year-old lead plaintiff Tiana Hutchins explained when the
lawsuit
was filed, she and many of her friends oppose the curfew because it is
unfair to punish good kids who are out trying to make something of
themselves
when only a small percentage of young people are committing crimes in
the
city during curfew hours.
Rights Around the Clock:
WASHINGTON -- Prince William County police would conduct unannounced, late-night sweeps to round up teenagers loitering after hours in public places under a curfew proposal to come before the Board of County Supervisors next month, the Washington Post reports. Teenagers caught in the roundups, to be carried out at least four times a year, would be taken to community curfew centers, where they would receive counseling and wait for their parents to pick them up. About 85 percent of the young people surveyed by Prince William police in July said they opposed a limit on their nighttime activities. Several interviewed last week said the proposed law would unfairly punish good children. I worked extremely hard to get my parents to trust me with a 12:30 curfew, said Chris Parker, a 17-year-old high school junior. I don't go out and drink or get high. I go to a coffee shop and talk. The Constitution say we have rights, but this law says we have to be 17 to get those rights. The sweeps are the centerpiece of a plan that would give the county the most aggressively enforced curfew in the area, barring people younger than 17 from being out from 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. on weekdays and midnight to 5 a.m. on weekends. None of the curfews in surrounding communities assign officers specifically to go out and catch violators. The push for a curfew comes despite persistent criticism from civil libertarians and skepticism about the laws' effectiveness from criminologists and law enforcement officials, including Prince William's police chief. The District enacted a curfew in the summer of 1995, but its constitutionality is being challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union, and police say they are making few efforts to enforce the law. Robert Plotkin, president of the National Capital Area ACLU, said juvenile curfews are a violation of teenagers' rights to speech and infringe on their freedom of movement and assembly. One concern is that they will be enforced in a discriminatory fashion, he said. Normally, police aren't' supposed to stop someone unless they have reasonable cause. A curfew makes it a crime just to be out on the street. Kenneth Adams, who is studying the impact of curfews on arrest rates for the National Institutes of Justice, said their popularity among residents often outweighs their real effectiveness. So far, we haven't seen that [curfews] have made a big impact, said
Adams,
a professor of criminology at Sam Houston State University in Texas.
Police
are the ones dealing with parents. You look impotent when you say doing
nothing is the best thing. You see that with politicians, too.
March 30, 1997. Copied by N.S. Gill .
Go to GeoCities Homesteading Page |
