Penny K. Zhitomi
With the increase of crime in our country committed by and toward young people, many state and local governments have attempted to deal with juvenile crime through juvenile night curfews. In 1986, for example, DeKalb County, Georgia, enacted a midnight to 5 a.m. curfew for persons under the age 18 in response to increased crime acts. Why are our legislatures allowed to prohibit children from being out at night when they do not do the same to adult criminals? Although a curfew aimed at all citizens could not possibly survive constitutional scrutiny, curfews aimed at children are often deemed legally permissible and accepted by our society.
Freedom of movement is one of the most important rights enjoyed by United States citizens. It is not until a right is taken away that you truly appreciate it. In many countries, you are
not
allowed such freedom. For Americans, however, as long as you are using the streets for a legitimate purpose, you can go wherever or whenever you please. During emergency situations, the government may impose curfews on
all
citizens- adults as well as minors. We have experienced such curfews in our recent history in Los Angeles, California, following the l992 not guilty verdict of LA police officers in the Rodney King beating trial. The curfews were obviously established to protect all citizens’ safety although it is a sharp contradiction from previously established laws prohibiting curfews against all people.
In the matters involving juvenile curfews, the state often oversteps the parents’ ultimate authority. Regardless of how a parent feels about his/her child being out after curfew hours, the state appears to have the final say. Parents have challenged this law based on their right to raise a family free from governmental interference or intervention. Courts have responded by stating that some situations allow for extra restraints on minors that could not constitutionally be placed on adults. Just recently in the news was a court decision in Orlando, Florida, that upheld a juvenile curfew despite pleas by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Circuit judge William Gridley denied a request to temporarily block the curfew which prohibits children under 18 from being in a 12- square block area from midnight to 6 a.m. Gridley said that he could not find that the law violates teenagers’ fundamental rights. There will be no exceptions for teenage tourists, including foreign visitors to Orlando.
Children’s Rights and the Law
discusses how an 1898 case called
Ex Carte McCarver
overturned a Texas city ordinance that forbid children aged twenty one and under to be “out on the streets” after 9 p.m. Almost one hundred years ago, however, it is important to note that juvenile delinquency was not as extreme as it is now. In the 1 990’s especially, it appears that the state must take a more active approach to parental issues than it did nearly a century ago. As an educator of children who would be affected by curfews, I feel that some curfews today established in major inner cities such as New Haven and Hartford are just trying to protect these children from random acts of violence.
The wording used in a legal curfew seems to be extremely important. For example, a California court ruled in 1945 in
People v. Walton
that children under age eighteen were prohibited from “being and remaining” on a public street between the hours of 9 p.m.- 4 a.m. The term “remaining” reduced any constitutional problems because its definition indicates clearly that such a behavior was considered loitering. Loitering was merely regulatory, not illegal.
Changing just a few words can really alter the interpretation of the law. By not clarifying themselves, legislatures can create unconstitutional ordinances. A perfect example of this legal ambiguity can be found in
City of Seattle v. Pullman
. The Washington Supreme Court struck down a curfew that prohibited “ minors from loitering, idling, wandering, or playing” in public between l0 p.m. - 5 a.m. Obviously, this law was filled with so many vague terms which could not clearly be defined that it was overturned. What constituted a minor? What was an acceptable definition of playing? Does this mean that a ten year old could be arrested for retrieving his ball that rolled off his lawn into the public street? Young people also argued against the term “loitering” because then again, could a minor be arrested for standing on the public sidewalk in front of his/her house? These examples make the law seem rather absurd.
I would like my sixth grade students to analyze cases that distinguish curfews between “remaining on streets” and merely being “ present out in public”. Students will have to decide if there are acceptable exceptions to each condition and what punishments should be in place for failure to obey such curfews. They must also consider what if the minor was with a parent or other adult. For example, some eighteen or nineteen year olds might be dating someone who is old enough not to be affected by a curfew. What would happen in situations such as these? How should a court decide if the minor was traveling home from a night job, church or school activity, or emergency situation? What if the teenager needs to work at night to help support his/her family financially? Will the courts pay the bills if that minor is not allowed to work a night job? My students must also consider how curfews in various towns will affect minors just traveling “through” such a town to reach another destination in a city that doesn’t inflict curfews on juveniles. For example, let’s say four teenagers are driving to a music concert in Hartford. They must drive through New Haven that has imposed a curfew on minors. They are stopped by police for a routine check in New Haven. Do they get arrested for breaking the curfew? These, and many other controversial issues, must be delicately handled in any discussion concerning juvenile curfews.
Other issues which I will present to my students for further debate include: curfews in cities or towns which have a college campus. Since some of the university students probably fall into the age limits of curfews, how should a municipality handle these areas? Do all college students have to be in their rooms by the designated hour? How could this be enforced on larger campuses where thousands of students are always out and about? What would policies be for college students that commute and tales night classes? Would there be exceptions and again, how would they be determined?
In juvenile curfews as well as other legal issues, the law is in the awkward position of wanting to protect children from harm and yet giving children as much autonomy as they can handle. “Age” is the difficult question which seems to have no feasible solution. Does someone become an adult at 18... 21... ? Interestingly, the age of majority used to be fifteen. Since each child’s maturity level is different, determining one age for ALL minors is a very grueling task. A young girl could be considered mature at 15 while a young boy could be 19 and still extremely immature. It is rather important to note that the controversy over a child’s level of maturity vs. their biological age is pertinent to all four issues mentioned in this unit.
