McKeiver v. Pennsylvania
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania was a pivotal Supreme Court case that addressed the application of the Sixth Amendment's right to a jury trial in juvenile proceedings. The case emerged after the landmark 1967 In re Gault decision, which recognized certain rights for juveniles but did not extend the jury trial guarantee to them. In its 1971 ruling, the Supreme Court determined that the right to a jury trial does not automatically extend to juveniles, stating that "fundamental fairness" is sufficient in juvenile court proceedings. This decision was rooted in the belief that juvenile justice should emphasize rehabilitation rather than punishment. McKeiver’s ruling has faced criticism from various legal scholars, yet it remains a significant precedent within juvenile law. The case illustrates the ongoing tension between the rights of young individuals in the justice system and the unique objectives of juvenile courts. This overview invites further exploration into the complexities of juvenile rights and the evolution of legal standards in this area.
McKeiver v. Pennsylvania
Date: June 21, 1971
Citation: 403 U.S. 528
Issue: Juvenile justice
Significance: The Supreme Court narrowed the broad due process protection given to juveniles in state proceedings in 1967.
When the Supreme Court rendered its 1967 In re Gault decision, the Sixth Amendment’s jury trial guarantee had not yet been applied to the states by incorporation. After the Court incorporated that right for adults in Duncan v. Louisiana (1968), the question arose of whether this guarantee should also be applied to juveniles. In McKeiver, which involved several cases regarding juvenile proceedings in North Carolina and Pennsylvania, the Court answered in the negative, deciding that Gault did not require strict conformity to the Sixth Amendment right to trial by jury but that “fundamental fairness” was all that was required. Despite some scholarly and legal criticism, the ruling in McKeiver remains valid law.