Policy Analysis I
Policy Analysis I
Courts in the United States have had a common practice of placing defendants in restraints from the point they leave their detention cells until the time the return, including the time spent in the courtroom. With the exception of a few states over the years, juvenile defendants are not treated any differently from adults in the courts regarding restraints. This paper will examine the issue surrounding juvenile restraints in the courtroom, the type of policy in place, who initiated the policy, if it is a constitutional issue, and who is affected by the issue.
The issue is if juvenile defendants should have restraints on when going through juvenile court proceedings. “The practice varies from district to district and from county to county, lawyers say. Some districts routinely leave juvenile defendants handcuffed and shackled in court. Others release all but leg shackles once the kids get to the courtroom” (Eisley, 2007, para. 2-3). Depending on the location, policies typically require restraints on prisoners during court proceedings for various reasons. However, just as administrators develop policies for adult courts to minimize restraints on certain defendants, the same is happening in the juvenile justice system. Policy makers are looking to place restraints on just those defendants who may pose a threat to others or escape.
Type of Policy
The policy of if a defendant should have restraints on when in the courtroom is regulatory because it is not considered a law that has passed through legislature. “Regulatory policies are designed to protect the public at large by establishing the conditions under which various activities can or cannot take place. What they regulate is behavior” (Marion & Oliver, 2006, p. 88). Because regulatory laws tell people what they can or cannot do, this type of policy is regulatory. This policy directs the court on the issue of a juvenile being in restraints...