A juvenile justice system that’s adrift

These are interesting times for those who work in the field of juvenile justice. In many states, lawmakers and voters are turning away from the 1990s model of treating youth offenders like adults and locking them up in adult prisons. Influential conservatives have banded together to support constructive and cost-effective alternatives to lengthy sentences. Across the nation, juvenile crime rates are falling, giving states some time and breathing room to restructure delinquency programs. Momentum is building for meaningful and cost-saving reform. All that’s lacking is national focus and strong leadership.

California’s example shows what happens when that leadership goes missing. Draconian laws put into place in the last 20 years still result in too many youth offenders here being sentenced and imprisoned as adults. Our prisons are bursting, the failing Juvenile Justice Division of the state corrections department has turned over much of its mission to counties, and Los Angeles County’s troubled Probation Department is operating under a federal consent decree while critics are calling for even broader scrutiny. What this state and many others need at just this time is effective and creative support from the federal office that for many years sorted through policies, promoted best practices and offered research and technical assistance. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention could help states and counties sort through what works and what doesn’t — and then advocate for legislation and funding to continue reducing juvenile delinquency.

Instead, the office has been left leaderless. Halfway through his term, President Obama has yet to nominate an administrator for the federal office that once reliably developed national policies and priorities. It is one of only two Department of Justice nominations the president has yet to make. As a result, the office has drifted from its mission while letting states fend for themselves, spending too much money on incarceration of juveniles and on ineffective programs.

The federal government should not be expected to take over the states’ primary role in juvenile justice. But beginning in 1974, when Congress adopted the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act, Washington has played a crucial role in helping states push their response to youth crime out of the dark ages. Now the act has lapsed, and without a leader at the office, bills to reauthorize it have gone nowhere. Federal funding for juvenile justice programs has dropped precipitously, and states have suffered as a consequence.

It’s well past time for Obama to name a leader for the office. He should act now, before more precious time is lost and more young offenders become set in their ways and add new burdens and costs to state justice systems.