Human Rights Protections for Children - State Ratings Report 2020

• Locations: United States of America • Topics: Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, Juveniles, Juvenile Prisons

Download original document:
Brief thumbnail

Document text

This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.

2020 State Ratings Report
Human Rights Protections for
Children in the U.S. Justice System

Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the Coalition for Public Safety, Represent
Justice, and the Weissberg Foundation for their support and
partnership in the creation of this report.
We also want to thank all of the advocates and policymakers who
work alongside us – in a bipartisan fashion – to end human rights
violations against children in the juvenile and criminal justice
systems. Lastly, we are grateful for the significant contributions to the
development of this report by Sarah Camiscoli of Yale Law School,
our 2020 summer law clerk.
This report is dedicated to all of the children who continue to suffer
human rights violations in juvenile detention facilities and adult jails,
lock-ups, and prisons across the country.

Photography by Richard Ross from juvenile-in-justice.com
Designed by Sandra Yeh
Icons made by Pixel perfect, Freepik, Kiranshastry, and Those Icons from www.flaticon.com

“There is no keener revelation of a society’s soul
than the way in which it treats its children.”
Nelson Mandela

Introduction
For the past three decades a tragic confluence of factors, including the policies inspired by
the now debunked “super-predator” theory, have wreaked havoc on children involved in the
criminal justice system. Back in May 2017 a bipartisan group of advocates, including 5 Republican
and 3 Democratic state legislators from across the country, joined together to establish Human
Rights for Kids to advocate on behalf of these vulnerable children. Our 2020 State Ratings Report on
Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System is the first ever national review and
rating of how well or how poorly states are doing at protecting the human rights of children in the
justice system.
The report examines 12 categories of law that are vital to establishing a basic legal
framework to protect the human rights of system-involved youth. These categories cover four main
areas: (1) entrance into the juvenile and criminal justice systems, (2) the treatment of children as
adults, (3) conditions of confinement, and (4) release and social reintegration of child offenders.
The report itself only examines policies enacted by state legislatures and does not account for state
court decisions or administrative rules, which may create additional protections for children. It is
also important to note that while our report is informed by human rights norms, including those
found in the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, it is not comprehensive in scope.
Our findings reveal that the overwhelming majority of the nation – 42 states – have made
minimal to no efforts to create a legal framework to protect the human rights of children in the
justice system. The worst offenders include Alabama, Georgia, Maryland, Mississippi, Tennessee,
and Wyoming who garnered only two points, respectively, in our ratings process. Despite common
misconceptions, traditionally “blue” or “liberal states” including Maryland, Illinois, New York,
Vermont, and Delaware are also among the worst states when it comes to protecting children’s
rights in the justice system. These states would be well served by looking to the leadership of
traditionally “red” or “conservative states” including Arkansas, North Dakota, and West Virginia
whose current legal framework better reflects the principle that there is no such thing as a throwaway child. An in-depth analysis of each state, including the statutory provisions we reviewed in
determining each state’s score, can be found on our website at humanrightsforkids.org.
Our State Ratings Report is intended to help educate policymakers across the country and
challenge them to live up to our highest ideals by changing the horrific way in which children in our
justice system are treated. Some may choose to look the other way at one of the worst ongoing
child rights abuses in the world today, but no one can ever again say that they did not know.
2

. i , HUMAN RIGHTS
~ for Kl DS

•
•
•
•
1

Tier One (10+ points)
State has created an impressive legal framework to protect
the human rights of children in its justice system and has
taken its obligation to defend human rights seriously.

8 Tier Two (7 - 9 points)
State has passed several laws to protect the human rights of
children in the justice system and should take additional steps
to improve and implement its burgeoning legal framework.

27 Tier Three (4 - 6 points)
State has made minimal efforts to protect the human rights of
children in the justice system and should take immediate
action to improve and implement its laws.

15 Tier Four (1 - 3 points)
State has made little to no effort to protect the human rights of
children in the justice system and is likely in violation of
international human rights standards.

2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

Best Human
Rights Protectors
California (9.5)
North Dakota (8)
Arkansas (7.5)

Worst Human
Rights Offenders
Alabama (2)
Georgia (2)
Maryland (2)
Mississippi (2)
Tennessee (2)
Wyoming (2)

Categories
DUE PROCESS
States receive credit for this category if they
have a statutory provision requiring children to
consult with their parents or legal counsel
before waiving their Miranda Rights or being
subject to a custodial police interrogation.
States will not receive credit if such protections
are limited to children subject to delinquency
proceedings. States may receive partial credit if
they apply these protections to some children
under a certain age (i.e. under 16), but not all
children under 18.

MINIMUM COURT AGE
States receive credit for this category if they
statutorily prohibit all children less than 10 years
of age from being adjudicated delinquent in the
juvenile court system, regardless of the charged
offense. Children this young who come into
conflict with the law should be provided
treatment and services in the child welfare
system in compliance with human rights
standards. No exceptions can be permitted to
receive credit for this category.

MAXIMUM COURT AGE
States receive credit for this category if they
statutorily permit children less than 18 years of
age to be adjudicated in the juvenile justice
system and have not excluded teenagers under
the age of majority. No exceptions can be
permitted to receive credit for this category.

LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE
States receive credit for this category if they
statutorily ban life without parole sentences
from being imposed on all children under 18
years of age. No exceptions can be permitted to
receive credit for this category. States that
permit judges to review and modify a child’s
sentence, including life without parole, after a
term of years will receive full credit for this
category.
4

ADULT COURTS
(A) States receive credit under this subsection if
they statutorily prohibit the transfer of children
under 14 years of age into the adult criminal
justice system. No exceptions can be permitted
to receive credit for this subsection, which
includes exclusions based on the type of crime
committed. For example, if a child under 14 may
be transferred to the adult system on a charge
of homicide, the state does not receive credit
for this category.
(B) States receive credit under this subsection if
they require a mandatory child status hearing
in all cases involving children less than 18 years
of age before allowing transfer to adult criminal
court. States that allow children to be subject to
direct file in adult court or statutorily exclude
certain children from the jurisdiction of the
juvenile court, may receive full credit only if they
require an immediate child status or reverse
waiver hearing in adult criminal court. No
exceptions can be permitted to receive credit
for this subsection.
States may receive partial credit for this
category if they meet the requirements of either
subsections (A) or (B).

MANDATORY MINIMUM
SENTENCES
States receive credit for this category if judges,
masters, magistrates, or others with sentencing
authority are authorized to depart from all
mandatory
minimum
sentences
when
sentencing children in adult criminal court.
States will only be awarded credit if they allow
discretion at the time that a sentence is being
imposed and not if they “theoretically” allow a
judge to later suspend the sentence. Nor will
states receive credit for allowing greater judicial
discretion under ‘youthful offender’ laws. States
may receive partial credit if they authorize
sentencing authorities to depart, up to a certain
percentage, from any mandatory minimum
sentence for any offense in adult criminal court.

FELONY-MURDER RULE
States receive credit for this category if they
statutorily eliminate the application of the
felony murder rule to children less than 18
years of age. In cases where a child does not
kill or intend to kill another person during the
commission of a felony, he or she should
receive a sentence based on his or her overall
culpability, which takes into account the
child’s trauma history and potential for
rehabilitation. States will receive credit for this
category if they do not have the felony murder
rule, have banned the felony murder rule for
children, or have created an affirmative
defense for persons who do not kill or intend to
kill during the commission of the felony. States
may receive partial credit if they place strict
limits on the applicability of the affirmative
defense or allow children who did not kill or
intend to kill to still be prosecuted pursuant to
the rule under other circumstances.

INCARCERATION
States receive credit for this category if they
statutorily prohibit the housing of children
under 18 years of age in adult correctional
facilities, including local jails and state prisons.
A child who has committed serious crimes or
who may be subject to prosecution in the adult
criminal justice system must continue to be
housed in juvenile correctional facilities until
they reach 18 years of age.

SOLITARY CONFINEMENT
States receive credit for this category if they
statutorily prohibit the use of solitary
confinement or administrative segregation on
children for punitive and safety-related
reasons. States are allowed to have individual
confinement for children as a “cooling off”
period, but such removal should be used only in
extreme cases, and only for as long as
reasonably necessary for the child to be
reintegrated with the rest of the children in the
facility. States may receive partial credit for this
category if they ban the use of solitary/room
confinement, isolation, or administrative
segregation for children in juvenile detention
facilities. However, in order to receive full credit,
states must have protections in place for kids in
both juvenile and adult correctional facilities.

POST-RELEASE SUPERVISION

States receive credit for this category if they
statutorily authorize formerly incarcerated
children serving lengthy terms of post-release
supervision to be discharged from supervision
at the discretion of the paroling authority or
judge. States will receive credit if they have
statutory provisions that apply to all formerly
incarcerated individuals, including children.
States may receive partial credit if they allow
most formerly incarcerated children to be
eligible for early discharge from supervision.

RELEASE SAFETY VALVE
States receive credit for this category if they
allow either the parole board or judges to
review all sentences previously imposed on
child offenders after no more than 30 calendar
years (end de facto life without parole). States
may receive partial credit for this category if
they have statutes permitting sentencing
review for nearly all offenses committed by
children. However, to receive full credit states
must allow children serving multiple sentences
of any duration and for any offenses to be
eligible for review.

VOTING RIGHTS
States that have eliminated voting rights for
persons convicted of serious offenses will
receive credit for this category if they statutorily
require or permit the restoration of voting rights
for formerly incarcerated children who have
been released from prison. States will not
receive credit if they require Gubernatorial
action before voting rights can be restored. If a
state allows for the reinstatement of voting
rights upon completion of the person’s
sentence, which includes parole or supervision,
the state must allow formerly incarcerated
children to seek discharge from parole or
supervision at a reasonable point after they
have been released in order to receive credit for
this category. A state may receive partial credit
if the vast majority of formerly incarcerated
children can have their voting rights restored
without executive action. However, a state will
not receive any credit if it permanently
disenfranchises formerly incarcerated children
convicted of certain offenses.

2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

State Ratings Chart
Alabama

Tier 1 (10+ points)

Alaska

Tier 2 (7-9 points)

Arizona

2.5

Tier 3 (4-6 points)

Arksansas

7.5

California

9.5

Colorado

6.5

Total Score

••
••
•t
•

Tier 4 (1-3 points)

Credit
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No Credit

Connecticut
Delaware

3.5

District of Columbia

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

5.5

Idaho

Illinois

3.5

Indiana

Iowa

2.5

Kansas

5.5

Kentucky

3.5

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

4.5

Mississippi

Missouri

.i, HUMAN RIGHTS
~ for Kl DS

Montana

4.5

Nebraska

Nevada

5.5

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

4.5

New York

3.5

North Carolina

3.5

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

3.5

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Carolina

3.5

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah
Vermont
Virginia

4.5
4
6.5

Washington

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

Due Process

•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

No Credit

SD
WY

o
~
w
-~::
KY, .
DC

TN
AZ

...

•

FL
-;-~

“Every child deprived of his or her liberty shall have the right to prompt access
to legal and other appropriate assistance . . .”
- Article 37 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child
“Every child alleged as or accused of having infringed the penal law has at least
the following guarantees . . . Not to be compelled to give testimony or to confess
guilt.”
- Article 40 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child
In 2019, the U.N. Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) affirmed that the assistance
available to children involved in the justice system under the Convention on the Rights of the Child
should be provided throughout the entire process, “beginning with the interviewing (interrogation)
of the child by the police . . .” In the United States, such legal protections are absolutely essential to
safeguarding children’s constitutional rights under Miranda v. Arizona. Unfortunately, only Virginia,
North Dakota, and California received full credit for having laws that require children to consult with
legal counsel or their parents prior to a custodial interrogation. States without such protections,
including those that received only partial credit, should look to North Dakota and California which
have the most expansive legal protections in place for children at the point of entry into the justice
system.

e Minimum Court•Age

•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

No Credit

WA
VT

NY ~
WY

•.1

'\,

~ ,:'

MD
DC

TN
SC
Al

..,

•

~ -;~

“States Parties shall seek . . . the establishment of a minimum age below which
children shall be presumed not to have the capacity to infringe the penal law.”
- Article 40 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child

One of the central pillars of human rights for children in the justice system is the
establishment of a minimum age of criminal culpability. While the CRC has encouraged states to
set the age at 14, our review of state laws around the United States revealed that only a minority of
states set a minimum age of at least 10, with Massachusetts being the only state to set a minimum
age of 12. While states are encouraged to follow the example of Massachusetts in this category, they
can also look to policies adopted in Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas which set the minimum age of
responsibility at 10. This is what we have deemed minimally necessary to protect the human rights
of children in the justice system, which we also believe will help to end the school to prison pipeline.
Unfortunately, 37 states and the District of Columbia have failed to meet this standard.

2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

Maximum Court Age

•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

No Credit

. J',:'"

-~MD
DC

•

“Juvenile offenders shall be segregated from adults and be accorded
treatment appropriate to their age and legal status.”
- Article 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
“States . . . shall seek to promote the establishment of laws, procedures,
authorities and institutions specifically applicable to children alleged as,
accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law . . .”
- Article 40 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child
In accordance with human rights law, the CRC has affirmed that “every person under the age
of 18 years at the time of the alleged commission of an offence has the right to be treated in
accordance with the rules of juvenile justice, in a specific and specialized system, different from the
criminal one applicable to adults.” This category is best viewed as the second pillar of human rights
protections for children, complementing the second category which requires the establishment of
a minimum age of criminal culpability. Fortunately, nearly every state was in compliance with this
category and received credit, with the exception of Georgia, Wisconsin, and Texas. These states
should take immediate action to pass “raise the age” legislation to allow all children under the age
of 18 to be adjudicated in the juvenile justice system.

Adult Courts

•

Full Credit

No Credit

~..

~,. '\~I

NJ
~

•

Partial Credit

~
TN

GA"T
FL

“Juvenile offenders shall be segregated from adults and be accorded
treatment appropriate to their age and legal status . . . the procedure shall be
such as will take account of their age and the desirability of promoting their
rehabilitation.”
- Articles 10 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Every state and the District of Columbia has created exceptions in their juvenile justice
statutes that permit children to be prosecuted in the adult criminal justice system under certain
circumstances. The extent and degree of these exceptions vary considerably. Some states have
statutorily precluded children of a certain age who are charged with certain offenses from being
adjudicated in the juvenile justice system altogether. While others allow juvenile court judges or
prosecutors to decide which venue they’ll use to proceed against a child in conflict with the law.
Exceptions violate the principles of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It is critical for the United States to establish a minimum age
below which children cannot be prosecuted as adults. We set a minimum age for allowing children
to be tried as adults at 14 – the same age the CRC has recommended for criminal responsibility in
the juvenile justice system. To earn full credit, however, states must also require a child status
hearing for all children before proceeding in adult court. Only one state received full credit – Kansas
– which requires a transfer hearing in juvenile court for all children between 14 and 17 years of age.
Nineteen other states received partial credit for prohibiting children under 14 from being prosecuted
as adults.

2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

Mandatory Minimum Sentences

•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

WI
Ml

OK
NM

--NJ
~

MA
CT

No Credit

AR
MS

•

“Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for
the inherent dignity of the human person, and in a manner which takes into
account the needs of persons of his or her age.”
- Article 37 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child
“Juvenile offenders shall be segregated from adults and be accorded
treatment appropriate to their age and legal status . . . the procedure shall be
such as will take account of their age and the desirability of promoting their
rehabilitation.”
- Articles 10 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Because children may be prosecuted under the laws of every state in the adult criminal
justice system it is vital for states to adopt policies that allow judges or juries to sentence children
differently than they would adult offenders. In light of children’s diminished culpability relative to
adults and increased prospects for treatment and rehabilitation, states must allow sentencers to
depart from any mandatory minimum sentence after a child has been convicted in adult court.
Only 4 jurisdictions – Virginia, Montana, Washington, and the District of Columbia – received full
credit for this category. Nevada received partial credit for allowing judges to depart up to 35%
below otherwise applicable mandatory minimum sentences. Unfortunately, most of the country
has not enacted policies giving greater flexibility to judges who are sentencing children. The
absence of this flexibility violates human rights standards. States should look to the Commonwealth
of Virginia for model provisions on how children should be sentenced if they are convicted in adult
court.
12

@ Felony-Murder Rule

•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

MT
MN

WI
Ml

I: ;.

"'R
I

MD
DC

,,,
MA

WY
IA

No Credit

SC
MS

“In the case of juvenile persons, the procedure shall be such as will take
account of their age and the desirability of promoting their rehabilitation.”
- Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Children often fail to appreciate the unintended consequences of their actions. Nowhere is
this more apparent than in felony murder cases where children can be criminally convicted of
murder even though they did not kill or intend to kill anyone during the commission of a felony
offense. To be consistent with human rights standards in treating children differently than adults
and promoting their rehabilitation, states must ban the application of the felony murder doctrine to
children who do not have the actual intent to kill another person. California, Hawaii, and Kentucky
are the only states that received full credit for banning the application of the felony murder doctrine
to children. While some states received partial credit for creating an affirmative defense to felony
murder, they did not receive full credit because their statutes had exceptions that could still lead to
criminal liability for a child who did not kill or intend to kill during the course of a felony offense.

2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

Life Without Parole

•

Full Credit

J''\RI

O
-'t::
PA

IL
KS

No Credit

NY\:

WI
IA

•

Partial Credit

'' - ~

~
TN

SC
MS

“States Parties shall ensure that . . . Neither capital punishment nor life
imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences
committed by persons below eighteen years of age.”
- Article 37 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child
The use of life without parole sentences on children is perhaps the worst human rights
violation profiled in our report, having been deemed cruel, degrading, and inhumane punishment
the world over. Such sentences cast an irrevocable judgement on a child that deem him or her
unworthy of living in free society ever again – no matter how much he or she changes over time.
Such punishment is categorically prohibited by the Convention on the Rights of the Child; however,
the United States remains the only nation that hasn’t ratified this treaty. States must ban life without
parole altogether – with no exceptions – in order to receive full credit. To date, 20 states and the
District of Columbia have enacted statutes banning the practice of sentencing children to die in
prison. States that have active parole systems should look to Utah or Nevada for model language
on banning juvenile life without parole. States without parole systems can look to North Dakota or
the District of Columbia for model language.

Release Safety Valve

•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

No Credit

\
NH

" "'RI

OH- ~;;
PA

-NJ

NC
OK

SC
AL

“States Parties shall ensure that . . . Neither capital punishment nor life
imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences
committed by persons below eighteen years of age . . . States Parties recognize
the right of a child who has been placed by the competent authorities for the
purposes of care, protection or treatment . . . to a periodic review of the
treatment provided to the child and all other circumstances relevant to his or
her placement.”
- Articles 25 and 37 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child
Banning the use of life without parole sentences on children can be an empty promise if
states can circumvent such statutes through the use of stacked or consecutive sentences and/or
sentencing enhancements. To come into full compliance with Articles 25 and 37 of the Convention
on the Rights of the Child, therefore, states must enact policies that end de facto life without parole
by requiring periodic sentencing review for all child offenders given lengthy prison sentences.
Referred to as a “release safety valve,” only 11 states and the District of Columbia received full or
partial credit for this category. Model sentencing review laws have been enacted by legislatures in
West Virginia (parole) and the District of Columbia (judicial) which give two equally viable
alternatives for states to come into compliance with this category.

2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

4@, Solitary Confinement
•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

No Credit

;;;J::
VA~ :;'

IA
IL

...lliil.. ..

OH. .

NC
SC

“States Parties shall ensure that . . . No child shall be subjected to torture or other
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
- Article 37 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child

The use of solitary confinement on children is strictly prohibited as a form of cruel and
inhumane treatment under international human rights standards. Yet, the majority of states – 31 –
do not have statutory provisions in place banning such treatment or provisions that strictly regulate
the use of limited room seclusion for children in state custody. Sadly, only 7 states and the District
of Columbia received full credit for banning solitary confinement for children. While some states did
receive partial credit for their statutes protecting children in the juvenile justice system, children in
adult prisons remain vulnerable to this human rights abuse. Indeed, children held in adult prisons
are often at greater risk for being subject to solitary confinement as they tend to fall through the
cracks of administrative regulations aimed at protecting children in the juvenile justice system.
States that received only partial credit should enact legislation expanding such protections to
children held in adult prisons, or, better yet, ban children from being incarcerated in adult prisons
altogether. California and West Virginia have the best laws in the country as they ban solitary
confinement for children in juvenile facilities and prohibit kids from being incarcerated in adult
prisons.

Incarceration

•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

No Credit

WA
VT

SD
WY

MO
OK

T'
C

MD
DC

AR
MS

OH,, ~DE
PA

NE
UT

LA
FL

•

-:-~

“States Parties shall ensure that...every child deprived of liberty shall be
separated from adults.”
- Article 37 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child
“Accused juvenile persons shall be separated from adults and brought as
speedily as possible for adjudication . . . Juvenile offenders shall be segregated
from adults and be accorded treatment appropriate to their age and legal
status.”
-Article 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Detaining or incarcerating children in adult jails, lock-ups, or prisons is a very clear violation
of human rights standards under both the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Such treatment of children increases their risk
of being subject to physical and sexual violence and limits the education and rehabilitative
programming that would otherwise be available to them. Additionally, children held in adult
facilities are often subject to conditions of solitary confinement or room seclusion which is also a
violation of human rights standards. This category was the greatest national human rights failure
of any we tracked. While many states sought to strictly regulate sight and sound restrictions
between children and adults in detention facilities, only 3 states prohibited detaining or
incarcerating children under any circumstances in adult facilities. California, Rhode Island, and
West Virginia are the only states in compliance with this category. Every other state should enact
statutory protections similar to those found in these jurisdictions.

2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

- - - - -• -•-

~ Post-Release Supervision
Full Credit

Partial Credit

•

No Credit

“States Parties recognize the right of every child . . . having infringed the penal
law to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child's sense
of dignity and worth, which reinforces the child's respect for the human rights
and fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account the child's
age and the desirability of promoting the child's reintegration and the child's
assuming a constructive role in society.”
- Article 40 of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child

Promoting reintegration and the assumption of a constructive role in society for formerly
incarcerated children necessarily includes the ability to discharge their full sentence, including any
period of post-release supervision. In General Comment 24, the Children's Rights Committee stated
that promoting reintegration requires a child in conflict with the law to be “protected from actions
or attitudes that hamper the child’s full participation in his/her community, such as stigmatization,
social isolation, or negative publicity.” In many states, post-release supervision is considered a part
of an offender’s sentence. For formerly incarcerated children serving lengthy prison sentences this
could mean lifetime supervision that hinders his or her ability to move on with their life, exercise their
full rights of citizenship, or assume a constructive role in society. Therefore, states should enact laws
that allow the supervising authority to discharge a formerly incarcerated youth from supervision at
a reasonable point after release. All but 7 states received full or partial credit for this category, with
Alaska having one of the best laws in the nation.

Voting Rights

•

Full Credit

•

Partial Credit

•

No Credit

The successful treatment and full social reintegration of children who come into conflict with
the law is the chief human rights principle behind many of the protections found in the Convention
on the Rights of the Child. However, a child cannot achieve full social reintegration if he or she is
denied the rights and privileges afforded to their fellow citizens. No right is more important to active
citizenship than the right of suffrage. Therefore, states must create a pathway for formerly
incarcerated children - who have reached the age of majority - to have their voting rights restored
upon release. States that require the completion of the entire sentence – including post-release
supervision – before the restoration of voting rights is permitted, must also create a mechanism
that allows formerly incarcerated children to be discharged from state supervision in order to earn
credit for this category. The overwhelming majority of states – 41 and the District of Columbia –
have statutes in place creating a pathway for all formerly incarcerated children to register to vote.
While Florida received partial credit, Alabama, Delaware, Iowa, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee,
Virginia, and Wyoming received no credit. These states can look to Vermont where voting rights are
never taken away or Nevada where formerly incarcerated youth are permitted to vote once they’ve
been released from prison, for model language to receive credit for this category.
2020 State Ratings on Human Rights Protections for Children in the U.S. Justice System

“As concluded by the Human Rights Committee in its observations on the
United States’ compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, the United States does not limit its treatment of children as
adults to exceptional circumstances. The Commission observes that the
ambiguity of this reservation has been converted into an expansive gap in
juvenile justice systems across the U.S., resulting in the violation of children’s
human rights on federal, state, and local levels.”
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, 2018

A Call to Action
This report offers a sobering assessment of the legal and policy failures that have facilitated
the proliferation of human rights violations against children in the criminal justice system. From the
point of entry to sentencing and incarceration, our findings make clear that we have a long way to
go if we are to be a nation that protects and defends the human rights of children who come into
conflict with the law. These state policy decisions have far-reaching and real world consequences.
Every year, more than 76,000 children are tried in the adult criminal justice system, with kids as
young as 10 years old being eligible for prosecution in adult court. It is estimated that on any given
day 4,500 children are housed in adult jails and prisons. And more than 10,000 people are currently
serving life sentences – with or without parole – for offenses committed as children. It is currently
unknown the total number of people incarcerated in U.S. prisons serving lengthy mandatory
minimum sentences for crimes committed as children.
Despite all of this, there are reasons to be hopeful. Arkansas, North Dakota, and California
lead the nation when it comes to protecting the human rights of children in the justice system. What
this tells us is that these basic human rights principles are bi-partisan in nature. Unfortunately, so
too are the states that are human rights offenders with Maryland, Alabama, and Georgia on the
wrong side of our ratings map. Republicans and Democrats are both leading on these issues; and
they are also both failing. This report offers us a snapshot of who we are today, but not who we are
capable of being. Human Rights for Kids was founded on the belief that all of us have the ability to
help create a world free of suffering and harm, a world worthy of our children. This report is a
challenge to advocates and policymakers everywhere to prioritize changing the way the criminal
justice system treats children.
As Nelson Mandela powerfully said, “there is no keener revelation of a society’s soul than the
way in which it treats its children.” How we respond to this report will reveal a great deal about the
soul of our nation.

Human Rights for Kids