The Supreme Court, in a landmark decision, provided for the rights of juveniles accused of committing crimes
Justice Abe Fortas,
For most of the twentieth century, juveniles were treated differently than adults in the belief that juveniles should have less adversarial, more informal adjudication of criminal activity. As the numbers of juveniles committing crimes rose, calls for more control increased. In a parallel development, the Court, under Chief Justice Earl Warren, also attempted to increase the protections for those accused of crimes, including juveniles, as in this ruling. In his partial dissent, Justice John M. Harlan II questioned whether Gault was a proper use of the due process clause. Justice Potter Stewart dissented, arguing that the decision made the juvenile and adult systems too similar.
Due process, procedural
Miranda v. Arizona
Winship, In re