The Law: And Juries for Every Child

Adults are entitled to a jury trial in serious criminal cases. But the right is not so clear for a child. Now a three-judge U.S. district court has ruled that, in federal courts at least, juveniles have a right to trial by jury just like their elders.

The case concerned a 16-year-old boy accused of violating the marijuana laws. Under the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act, he could be tried as an adult before a jury. But that would mean facing full adult penalties, which for him would be a sentence of from five to 20 years upon conviction. On the other hand, he could choose to have his case heard as a juvenile; then he could not be held past the age of 21 and would have no record of a conviction. By choosing to be treated as a juvenile, however, he would automatically waive his right to trial by jury.

The three-judge court, which sat in New York's Southern District, attacked the delinquency act from two directions. First, the Supreme Court last year in In Re Gault clearly stated that the Bill of Rights is not "for adults alone"; in light of that, the judges were persuaded that the Sixth Amendment trial-by-jury guarantee applies to juveniles in federal courts. They also objected on the basis that the law involves a "rock or whirlpool" choice. "Where a reward is held out to an individual for the waiver of a constitutional right," wrote Judge Harold Tyler, "or a greater threat posed for choosing to assert it, any waiver may be said to have been extracted in an impermissible manner." The judges ruled unconstitutional that part of the act that imposes a "Hobson's choice." Instead, the boy may choose to be treated as a juvenile, and may have a jury trial—"if he so desires."