10.9. Returning to Rehabilitation in the Contemporary Juvenile 
Justice System 
ALISON S. BURKE 
Empirical research drives recent reform efforts. The past decade has witnessed the identification of key 
developmental processes associated with delinquent behavior, such as brain development research. Ergo, 
evidence-based practices, which utilize the scientific method to assess the effectiveness of interventions, 
policies, and programs. In looking at what works, what doesn’t, and what is promising, researchers and 
policymakers alike assess the implementation of interventions to best meet the needs of the individual 
youth. 
Additionally, several noteworthy Supreme Court cases exemplify society’s evolving standards of decency 
and treatment of youth. These key cases demonstrate a move back to rehabilitation and acknowledge the 
fundamental differences between children and adults. 
Key Supreme Court Cases 
Roper v Simmons (2005) 
Roper v Simmons (2005) 
In 2005, a landmark decision by the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to impose a death penalty 
sentence on any youth who was under the age of 18 when they committed their offense (Roper v. Simmons). 
Although Christopher Simmons planned and committed a capital offense (he murdered his neighbor, 
Shirley Cook), the court ruled that 18 years of age is where criminal responsibility should rest. That is 
to say, if a child is too young to vote, sign contracts, or do a number of other things (because society 
deems them not responsible enough), then they are too young to receive the death penalty. The court 
stated,“the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” to determine which 
punishments are so disproportionate as to be “cruel and unusual.”  Simmons received life in prison. It was 
ruled that imposing the death penalty on a person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the crime 
constituted cruel and unusual punishment. At the time of the Roper v Simmons verdict, the U.S. was only 
407