Criminal Justice Reform Advisory Council Report 2022

FINAL
REPORT
2022
Criminal Justice Reform
Advisory Council

Table of Contents
01
Foreword p 03
02
Meet the Advisory Council Members
p 04
03
Introduction
p 05
04
Sentencing Reform for Youth
p 06
05
Bail Reform for Youth
p 08
06
Youth Miranda Rights
p 09
07
Anti-Recidivism Efforts for Youth p 10
08
Youth Facilities
p 11
09
Parents in the Prison System
p 12
10
Conclusion
p 13

0 3
Foreword
Foreword
In this time of heightened political polarization, few policy areas have seen bipartisan
cooperation as much as criminal justice reform. In red, blue, and purple states, legislators
have grabbed headlines for their efforts to put aside seemingly intractable rivalries to
develop new insights and coalitions that attempt a more equitable system of justice for all
Americans.
There is an urgency to this work. By several measures, the United States maintains one of
the largest incarcerated populations in any developed country. The ramifications of this
fact are staggering on our economy, political system, and society as a whole. Reformers
cannot afford to be thwarted by partisan bickering.
To help provide a framework for legislators to meet and hold discussions on this
important issue, Millennial Action Project launched the second iteration of the Criminal
Justice Reform Advisory Council for the year of 2022. Convened with the intention of
building on the work of the Criminal Justice Reform Advisory Council of 2021, this year’s
efforts prioritized in-depth discussions on specialized criminal justice issues, primarily
juvenile justice.
The past few years have seen legislatures across the country move forward with no
shortage of ideas and proposals to overhaul the treatment of our nation’s children within
the criminal justice system. From sentencing reform to bail reform, from protecting
Miranda rights to anti-recidivism policies, the road to a more just future for juvenile
justice remains wide open and ready to be pioneered by young elected officials who have
already brought so much passion and attention to these important topics.
This report details the issues discussed by the CJRAC and the key areas where young,
bipartisan leaders at the state level are seeking to make their voices heard in the
legislative sessions ahead.

Meet the Members
Meet the Criminal Justice
Reform Advisory Council
The second iteration of the Criminal Justice Reform Advisory Council was finalized in early
2022. The first meeting was held on May 26th. All of the members on this panel
demonstrate dynamic bipartisan leadership relating to criminal justice reform policies in
their respective legislatures. In the CJRAC’s meetings, these legislators met with outside
experts and had conversations among themselves regarding the status of juvenile justice
reform, building off of the work done by the previous Criminal Justice Reform Advisory
Council in 2021.
This report details approaches to criminal justice policy identified by members of the
Criminal Justice Reform Advisory Council relating to juvenile justice reform. State
legislator participation on MAP’s Future of Work Advisory Council does not imply
individual support for any or all of the methods identified in this document.
Council Members
Rep. Daniel Pae (R-OK)
Co-Chair
Rep. Jamie Scott (D-AR)
Co-Chair
Rep. Torren Ecker (R-PA)
Sen. Mujtaba Mohammed (D-NC)
Rep. Sara Rasmussen (R-AK) Rep. Leonela Felix (D-RI) Rep. Bobby Cox (R-SC) Rep. Taylor Small (D-VT)

0 5
Introduction
Introduction
The second iteration of the Millennial Action Project’s Criminal Justice Reform Advisory
Council built on the recommendations of the first. Among the most pressing topics
identified for further attention was juvenile justice reform.
Over the course of its meetings, the CJRAC discussed a variety of issue areas and
proposals relating to juvenile justice reform and met with several different issue area
experts. Legislators had an opportunity to strategize with leading organizations and
practitioners to identify areas with the greatest potential for reform.
This report summarizes the research and findings presented to the council members,
including various pieces of bipartisan legislation that can serve as a model for other states.

Sentencing Reform
Sentencing Reform for Youth
Sentencing reform for young offenders can best be summarized as efforts intended to lower the overall number of
incarcerated youth. While incarceration rates have declined, there is still work to be done in reducing demographic
disparities among currently incarcerated youth and limiting youth in adult facilities.
Positive Trends and Legislative Results
Youth Incarceration Rates Nationwide are Decreasing
The Sentencing Project, one of the nation’s leading advocacy groups on justice reform,
found that the number of teenagers committed to juvenile facilities in the U.S. has
fallen almost two-thirds since its peak of 76,000+ in 2000. The Sentencing Project
credits this development to a web of state policies and initiatives ranging from the
promotion of least-restrictive detention options for juveniles to increasing the age
limit for juvenile court jurisdiction.
Causation Legislation
FLHB 885 (Bipartisan, Enacted, 2021): Requires a court to consider specified
information before ordering a child into custody for failure to appear. The intent of
this legislation is to reduce the amount of juvenile detentions based on the state’s
failure to properly communicate with these individuals.
OK HB2311 (Bipartisan, Enacted, 2021) : Prohibits the detention of all persons under
18 years of age in an adult facility except in certain circumstances. The intent of this
legislation is to reduce exposure of juveniles to adult facilities.
Areas for legislative solutions
Racial Disparities in the Juvenile System
Racial disparities in incarceration rates have been a persistent problem in the criminal
justice system. According to the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers,
juvenile incarceration has proved no different:
Non-white juvenile incarceration rates have have declined at a slower rate
compared to white juveniles;
The racial disparity between black and white youth in custody increased by 22%
from 2001 to 2015;
Black youth accounted for 67.7% of mandatory and discretionary transfers to the
adult prison system in 2016;
On average, judges give 7.8% longer prison sentences to black youth compared to
white youth for the same offenses.

0 7
Sentencing Reform
Youth in Adult Facilities
In 2019, 2,900 juveniles nationwide were incarcerated in adult jails and 653 were
incarcerated in adult prisons, according to The Sentencing Project. Every year, an
additional 95,000 juveniles are housed in adult jails or prisons. The Equal Justice
Initiative (EJI), a legal nonprofit that supports underprivileged prisoners, conducted
research that found placing young offenders in adult facilities increases the likelihood
of being sexual assaulted by five times and increases the likelihood a juvenile attempts
suicide by nine times. EJI also writes that many juveniles in the adult criminal justice
system suffer from untreated mental illness, while lacking adequate safeguards in
adult facilities to properly shield them from violence.
Solution-Focused Legislation
ME LD 2 (Partisan, Enacted, 2021): Provides for a study with the eventual goal of
establishing and implementing a system of using racial impact statements for criminal
justice bills during the legislative process.
MD SB165 (Partisan, Not Enacted, 2022): Prohibits any automatic charging of a youth
offender as an adult in a court of law. The intent of this legislation is to limit the amount
of youth serving in adult facilities.

Bail Reform
Bail Reform for Youth
Bail reform refers to policies that reduce or eliminate financial burdens placed on young offenders through the court
system. Such efforts can focus on either young offenders established as indigent or young offenders as a whole.
Areas for Legislative Solutions
Unaffordable Cash Bail for Young Offenders
The permissibility of cash bail for young offenders has emerged as a topic of growing
concern among criminal justice advocates. Bail for juveniles is mostly determined by
state law. The National Juvenile Defender Center (NJDC) commissioned a report in
2019 to document each state’s practices regarding juvenile bail. This report found that
bail for children was “a matter of pure judicial discretion” with some defense attorneys
reporting bail numbers ranging into the tens- or hundreds-of-thousands of dollars and
no discussion of ability to pay. Even bail as low as $75 presented difficulties for a
family to post. Unaffordable bail was shown to result in longer detentions of children
before trial, separating them from their families based solely on an inability to pay.
Controversy Regarding Bail Reform's Effectiveness
With national concern over the increase in crime rates, bail reform policies have
attracted attention as a potential contributing factor. Opponents of lessening bail
restrictions argue that it leads to a quick release of potential repeat offenders;
however, current evidence points to a mixed conclusion. One analysis of recent bail
reforms conducted by the Prison Policy Institute concluded that after review of 13
jurisdictions: "all but one… saw decreases or negligible increases in crime after
implementing reforms." In contrast, a study conducted by the University of Utah
concluded that bail reforms in Cook County, Illinois, were statistically associated with
subsequent increases in crime rates. Ultimately, the effectiveness of bail reform is
likely to continue to garner debate.
Controversy Regarding Bail Reform's Effectiveness
CO SB21-071 (Bipartisan, Enacted, 2021): Prohibits the imposition of cash or
property-secured bonds for juveniles charged with a delinquent act.
NJ S3319 (Bipartisan, Enacted, 2022): Eliminates certain juvenile fines, fees, costs, and
other monetary penalties.

0 9
Youth Miranda Rights
Youth Miranda Rights
Legal precedent requires juvenile offenders the right to be read a Miranda warning; however, there have been a number
of obstacles that have raised concerns over the equitability and effectiveness of current Miranda procedures for
juveniles. Among these are concerns over juveniles’ understanding of Miranda procedures, notification of parents, and
determining when a juvenile is in custody.
Areas for Legislative Solutions
Helping Juveniles Understand Miranda Rights
Given the legal and constitutional complexities behind Miranda rights, it is not
surprising that many young offenders simply do not understand these rights and thus
are more likely to waive them and risk self-incrimination during a police interrogation.
The American Bar Association has listed the rate at which juveniles waive their
Miranda rights as high as 90%. The ABA further writes that this dynamic is caused by
multiple factors, such as the socialization of young people to answer questions for
adults and that juvenile offenders tend to have more intellectual disabilities or mental
health disorders that severely impact their judgment. As such, the ABA has thrown
support behind legislation to provide simplified Miranda warnings to young offenders.
Required Contact of Parents or Guardians
While the only constitutionally established Miranda rights are the right to remain
silent and the right to legal counsel, there has been debate over whether these rights
alone are sufficient to ensure due process for juveniles. One potential expansion of
rights for the benefit of young suspects is to enshrine a greater role for parents or
guardians during police interrogation or when a juvenile is in custody. This policy
formed a critical part of Maryland’s Child Interrogation Protection Act which requires
police to make a reasonable effort to contact a child’s parents before an in-custody
interrogation.
Demonstrative Legislation
AZ HB2309: (2022, Bipartisan, Passed House) Requires detained juveniles be advised
by a peace officer of their Miranda Rights in comprehensible language before
questioning begins.
MD SB0053: (2022, Partisan Bill, Law) Requires the law
enforcement officer who takes a child into custody to provide actual
notice to the child’s parents or guardian, with specific information on
the child’s location and how to make in-person contact.

Anti-Recidivism
Anti-Recidivism Efforts for Youth
Anti-recidivism efforts reduce repeated offenses by juveniles after their initial period in the criminal justice system. Antirecidivism
efforts for youths differentiate from adults by a greater emphasis on education, mentoring, and family support.
Positive Trends and Legislative Results
Preventing Juvenile Recidivism
There has been strong policy evidence about what role states can play in combating
juvenile recidivism. In 1997, the Washington state legislature passed the Community
Juvenile Accountability Act to promote the use of research-based programs to reduce
juvenile crime. Among the programs introduced were Functional Family Therapy
(FFT), which sought to reduce criminal risk factors in an offender’s family, and
Aggression Replacement Therapy (ART), which offered learning techniques to control
impulsive behavior. The Washington State Institute for Public Policy found that 7
years after implementation, FFT was associated with a 38% reduction in felony
recidivism while ART was associated with a 24% reduction. Findings such as these
suggest that increased funding for evidence-based mental health programs may be
crucial to limiting the amount of youth recidivism.
Causation Legislation
WA SB5304 (Bipartisan, Enacted, 2021): Provides societal reentry services to persons
released from state and local institutions, including juvenile detention facilities.
TN HB0240 (Bipartisan, Enacted, 2021): Authorizes counties to develop and operate
transition centers designed to reduce recidivism rates among former offenders.
Areas for Legislative Solutions
Unlike research on adult recidivism rates, juvenile recidivism rates have suffered from
basic gaps in reporting that have in turn led to occasionally inadequate policy responses.
The Justice Center at the Council of State Governments confirms that up to 20% of state
juvenile corrections agencies don’t track recidivism rates among their populations. The
Justice Center provides further recommendations that states should create a system
where pressures towards youth recidivism are combated through the usage of data and
direct system evaluation.
Solution-Focused Legislation
CT SB206 (Bipartisan, Enacted, 2022): Among other provisions, permits the Court
Support Services of the state Judicial Branch to share common case records for the
purposes of tracking recidivism.
IN HB1359 (Bipartisan, Enacted, 2022): Provides that the Commission on Improving
the Status of Children in Indiana shall create a statewide oversight body to collect and
report juvenile justice data.

1 1
Youth Facilities
Youth Facilities
Despite the confinement of juvenile offenders having seen a pronounced decline since 2000, efforts have continued to
further reduce the population of young prisoners. Some of these efforts have focused on the quality and safety of youth
detention facilities with the goal of promoting less restrictive confinement as well as closing down unnecessary or
dangerous facilities.
Areas for Legislative Solutions
The Missouri Model
The “Missouri Model” refers to juvenile justice agency policies that promote a shift
away from correctional-style confinement of young offenders and toward smaller,
dorm-like rehabilitative facilities. Research from facility reform organizations such as
the Vera Institute and the Prison Law Office has presented strong evidence that lessrestrictive
confinement models enhance rehabilitation efforts and reduce the harm
incarceration inflicts on those confined. This research has led the Prison Policy
Institute, one of the nation’s leading criminal justice reform organizations, to endorse
the Missouri Model as a pathway to improved facilities for juvenile offenders.
Causation Legislation
Entry into the criminal justice system is often considered one of the most stressful and
challenging experiences among juveniles. For young offenders, these stresses are
compounded by a lack of social and life experiences, and incomplete mental
development. The result, according to the Justice Policy Institute, is a disruption of
mental development, a greater risk of self-harm, and an increase in mental disorders
that can have lifelong impacts and push a youth toward recidivism. Like other
organizations, JPI recommends a shift away from a carceral approach to young
offenders in favor of less-restrictive and family or community-based programs that
encourage positive development among juveniles who find themselves on the wrong
side of the law.
Demonstrative Legislation
VA SB108: (2022, Bipartisan, Law) Directs the Department of Corrections to convene
a work group to study the use of restorative housing within juvenile correctional
centers.
WA SB5121: (2021, Partisan Bill, Enacted) Expands eligibility for the
state graduated re-entry program for incarcerated individuals in the
state correctional system, including juveniles.

Parents
Parents in the Prison System
The involvement of a child’s parents in the juvenile justice system has been a topic of increased interest as reformers
look for ways to humanize current policies. When a child finds themself in legal trouble, there are few codified guidelines
on what role, if any, their parents are meant to play in supporting their child through the legal process. Recent efforts
have worked to create a more comprehensive role for parents in rehabilitation efforts for a young offender.
Areas for Legislative Solutions
Parents Bill of Rights
One way jurisdictions have sought to codify the role of parents in the juvenile justice
system is the creation of a “parents bill of rights” that succinctly describes what
parents can rightfully expect as they navigate and support their child through the
criminal justice system. The two most prominent jurisdictions to fully adopt this
approach are the District of Columbia and Texas. Texas’ bill of rights guarantees to
parents an opportunity to design and implement a treatment plan for their child from
their initial intake into the criminal justice system to their discharge.
Parents as Partners, not Problems
Research compiled by Northwestern University delineates how the criminal justice
system has taken a low view of parental involvement often based on the assumption
that parental inadequacy is a cause of juvenile delinquency. Northwestern’s research
disputes this assumption, citing that the vast majority of youth in juvenile justice
facilities (85%) are released to a private address; this indicates some type of familial
ties exist for most young offenders. Northwestern’s report further indicates that
active parental involvement in a juvenile offender’s treatment, such as through family
therapy, is associated with a nearly 50% reduction in recidivism.
Demonstrative Policies
Parental Bill of Rights: As mentioned above, DC and Texas are two jurisdictions with
currently-enacted bills of rights for parents as they deal with the juvenile justice
system. In Texas’ case, the implementation of the Bill of Rights was guided by
legislation.
Family Therapy with the Juvenile and Parents: Parents play a key role in the juvenile
justice system for they are the leaders in family-based interventions to promote
rehabilitation for the juvenile offender. Among the most prominent therapies are
Positive Family Support, Functional Family Therapy, and Multisystemic Therapy–
Family Integrated Transitions.

1 3
Conclusion
Conclusion
The ongoing debate over criminal justice reform is not likely to simmer down anytime
soon. Now, more than ever, it is important to highlight and provide support to the work of
young, bipartisan leaders in this field as they work to craft solutions to this pressing issue.
Furthermore, at a time where there has been growing public concern about potential
increases in crime rates, it is also important to emphasize areas of work where there is
conclusive evidence that reform efforts are not tied to any increases in the underlying
crime rate.

1 4
F o l l o w M A P
WWW.MILLENNIALACTION.ORG
@MACTIONPROJECT
@MACTIONPROJECT
@MILLENNIALACTIONPROJECT
/MILLENNIALACTIONPROJECT
@MILLENNIALACTIONPROJECT