Race and the fragility of the legal distinction between juveniles and adults.
Legal precedent establishes juvenile offenders as inherently less culpable than adult offenders and thus protects juveniles from the most severe of punishments. But how fragile might these protections be? In the present study, simply bringing to mind a Black (vs. White) juvenile offender led participants to view juveniles in general as significantly more similar to adults in their inherent culpability and to express more support for severe sentencing. Indeed, these differences in participants' perceptions of this foundational legal precedent distinguishing between juveniles and adults accounted for their greater support for severe punishment. These results highlight the fragility of protections for juveniles when race is in play. Furthermore, we suggest that this fragility may have broad implications for how juveniles are seen and treated in the criminal justice system.
Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America. arattan@stanford.edu
Aneeta
A
Rattan
Cynthia S
CS
Levine
Carol S
CS
Dweck
Jennifer L
JL
Eberhardt
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D003416:Criminal Law; D003625:Data Collection; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007604:Juvenile Delinquency / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011678:Punishment / Q000523:psychology*; D044469:Racial Groups; D014481:United States