Justice By Geography

Differential Treatment of Youth by Locality at Juvenile Legal System Decision Points

“Justice by geography” is defined as the differential application of justice policies and practices across a state or region. CfJJ’s latest issue brief “Justice By Geography: Differential Treatment of Youth by Locality at Juvenile Legal System Decision Points” establishes that this phenomenon is real in Massachusetts and identifies decision points where it presents within our juvenile legal system.  

Data establishes that police– the gatekeeper at the front door of the juvenile legal system–do not treat all youth the same, with more aggressive policing strategies and targeted ‘hot spot’ policing practices being employed in larger cities, especially in neighborhoods of color. This difference in the application of policing resources and practices leads to significant differences in the treatment of youth, with over-surveillance, arrests and referral to the legal system disproportionately impacting youth of color. This brief also addresses the role that other system decision makers play deeper in the juvenile legal system process and how their decisions similarly impact justice by geography in Massachusetts. 

“Justice by Geography” provides a county-level reflection on data, with the aim of spurring action from system actors at the state and local level to ensure that all youth are treated fairly in the system, regardless of where in the Commonwealth they live. 

Findings

The brief’s findings– several of which are below– draw upon publicly available data, evaluating juvenile court trends at five process points: Applications for Complaint, Pre-trial Proceedings, Adjudications, Dispositions, and Youthful Offender Charges. 

Decision Point 1: Applications for Complaint  

The Barnstable court district has the highest per capita rate of applications for complaint entering its juvenile court, while youth in Hampden and Suffolk counties experience the highest rates of applications initiated through an arrest. 

Juvenile Applications for Complaint Per Capita by County (FY22)1

Decision Point 2: Pre-Trial Proceedings 

District Attorneys in Berkshire, Bristol and Essex Counties request dangerousness hearings – where a youth can be held without bail – for youth at higher rates than in other court districts. Further, in 8 out of 11 counties, Black and Latine youth made up over 50% of dangerousness hearings in FY22, despite making up only 28% of the Massachusetts youth population. Suffolk County also shows trends towards incarceration, as over half of their arraigned youth are detained prior to adjudication. Statewide, 79% of youth in pre-trial detention across the Commonwealth are Black or Latine.  

Percent of Arraigned Youth Assigned Dangerousness Hearings by County (FY22) 

Dangerousness Hearings Per Capita Rate by County (FY22) 

Decision Point 3: Adjudications  

Suffolk County has the highest rate of delinquent adjudications among Massachusetts counties, while Essex has the lowest. 

Percent of Delinquency Cases Adjudicated Delinquent by County (FY22)

Decision Point 4: Dispositions  

More than half of youth adjudicated delinquent in Hampden County are committed to DYS. Youth in Barnstable County receive risk-need probation (featuring more intensive supervision) at higher rates than youth in other court counties. 

Youthful Offenders 

Suffolk and Essex Counties brought forward the most youthful offender charges in FY22, and Black and Latine youth are dramatically overrepresented in youthful offender filings in relation to the racial makeup of the counties in which they were charged. 

Youthful Offender Filings per Capita by County (FY22)