Juvenile Justice
State v. Ochoa
This case in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals concerns the admissibility of a fourteen-year-old defendantâs confession following a Texas Rangerâs coercive interrogation. The ACLUâs State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Texas, filed an amicus brief arguing that the defendantâs confession was induced by positive promises, and is inadmissible, particularly given his juvenile status and the circumstances of the interrogation. In November 2024, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (the highest court for criminal appeals in Texas) ruled that Holland's interrogation of Ochoa was unconstitutionally coercive in violation of Ochoa's Fourteenth Amendment due process rights.
Status: Closed
View Case
Learn About Juvenile Justice
All Cases
12 Juvenile Justice Cases
Montana Supreme Court
May 2024
Juvenile Justice
+2 Issues
Held v. Montana
This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLUâs State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.
Explore case
Montana Supreme Court
May 2024
Juvenile Justice
+2 Issues
Held v. Montana
This case pending before the Montana Supreme Court asks, among other things, whether the claims of sixteen youth plaintiffs challenging Montana energy policy present a political question under the Montana Constitution. The ACLUâs State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Montana, filed an amicus brief arguing that the claims do not present a political question and, moreover, that state courts should not wholesale adopt the federal political questions doctrine.
South Carolina
Feb 2023
Juvenile Justice
+2 Issues
CYAP v. Wilson
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolinaâs âdisturbing schoolsâ and âdisorderly conductâ laws. The laws allowed students in school to be criminally charged for normal adolescent behaviors including loitering, cursing, or undefined âobnoxiousâ actions on school grounds and encouraged discriminatory enforcement against Black students and students with disabilities. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling that enforcing these laws against students was unconstitutional, affirming that subjecting students to criminal penalties under such vague rules interferes with their education and their future, and produces stark racial disparities. This decision should be instructive to the many school districts across the country where students continue to be charged with âdisorderly conductâ and similar vague crimes.
Explore case
South Carolina
Feb 2023
Juvenile Justice
+2 Issues
CYAP v. Wilson
The American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit challenging South Carolinaâs âdisturbing schoolsâ and âdisorderly conductâ laws. The laws allowed students in school to be criminally charged for normal adolescent behaviors including loitering, cursing, or undefined âobnoxiousâ actions on school grounds and encouraged discriminatory enforcement against Black students and students with disabilities. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court ruling that enforcing these laws against students was unconstitutional, affirming that subjecting students to criminal penalties under such vague rules interferes with their education and their future, and produces stark racial disparities. This decision should be instructive to the many school districts across the country where students continue to be charged with âdisorderly conductâ and similar vague crimes.
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Juvenile Justice
Jones v. Mississippi
Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a judge or jury to make a finding that a juvenile is âpermanently incorrigibleâ before imposing a sentence of life without parole.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Dec 2021
Juvenile Justice
Jones v. Mississippi
Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a judge or jury to make a finding that a juvenile is âpermanently incorrigibleâ before imposing a sentence of life without parole.
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2019
Juvenile Justice
Mathena v. Malvo
Whether a juvenile sentenced to life without parole is entitled to a new sentencing proceeding following the Supreme Court's decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, which have retroactive effect to a previous decision prohibiting mandatory sentences of life without parole for juveniles, where it is unclear whether the original sentence was imposed under a mandatory or discretionary state sentencing scheme.
Explore case
U.S. Supreme Court
Sep 2019
Juvenile Justice
Mathena v. Malvo
Whether a juvenile sentenced to life without parole is entitled to a new sentencing proceeding following the Supreme Court's decision in Montgomery v. Louisiana, which have retroactive effect to a previous decision prohibiting mandatory sentences of life without parole for juveniles, where it is unclear whether the original sentence was imposed under a mandatory or discretionary state sentencing scheme.