The Impact of Safe Harbor Legislation on Court Proceedings Involving Sex Trafficked Youth: A Qualitative Investigation of Judicial Perspectives

The passage of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) facilitated the conceptual shift in reframing youth involved in sex trafficking as victims, rather than criminals. Many states have passed legislation in the form of Safe Harbor laws to protect sex trafficked juveniles from criminal charges and provide rehabilitative services (Polaris, 2015). Nevertheless, limited research has examined the impact of Safe Harbor laws and the role juvenile and family court judges play in how minor victims of sex trafficking are treated by the court system. Consequently, the purpose of this qualitative study was to examine juvenile and family court judges’ knowledge and perceptions of Safe Harbor legislation and identify legal challenges when presiding over cases involving sexually exploited youth. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with a national sample (N = 82) of family and juvenile court judges. Findings suggest that respondents perceive Safe Harbor laws to have positively affected both attitudes and practices, although several challenges and unintended negative effects were identified. Further, dispositional issues, difficulties with case identification, legal and policy issues, and challenges with interagency collaboration were identified as ongoing issues to address. Legal implications as well as practice and policy considerations based on the study findings are discussed.     

Juvenile and Family Court Judges’ Knowledge and Attitudes About Sex Trafficking of Minors: Associations with Gender,Race, and U.S. Region

Juvenile and family court judges are a professional group that have a significant amount of decision-making power in cases of sex trafficking of minors. The purpose of this project is to examine the association of juvenile and family court judges’ gender, race, and U.S. region with their attitudes and knowledge about sex trafficking of minors. Drawing from a survey of 55 juvenile and family court judges in the U.S., this study used standardized scales to measure attitudes and knowledge about child sex trafficking. Results indicate some differences by gender and geography in a sample of experienced judges across the U.S. The consistency of these findings are discussed in the context of other research and implications for targeted training.     

CONFIDENTIALITY,DUE PROCESS,AND JUDICIAL DISQUALIFICATION IN THE UNIFIED FAMILY COURT: REPORT TO THE HONORABLE STEPHANIE DOMITROVICH

To the extent that courts realize the pure one judge–one family notion of the unified family court—in which one judge handles all domestic relations, probate, juvenile dependency, juvenile delinquency, and domestic violence cases involving members of the same family—they encounter three potential legal barriers: confidentiality of court records in some of the cases, due process issues arising from the consideration of material from a related case file in which the parties to the current case may or may not be parties, and judicial disqualification arising from the judge's handling of a previous case involving the family. This article summarizes information obtained from a survey conducted for the Children and Family Law Committee of the National Conference of State Trial Judges, of courts in sixteen states, to learn how they have resolved these legal issues.     

擎制与突围:法院受理环境公益诉讼案件动力机制的缺陷与重塑

理论界和实务界对环境公益诉讼的研究普遍忽视了法院/法官对于环境公益诉讼案件的认知与态度,当前法院与法官普遍对于环境公益诉讼持有保守与拒绝的态度,其原因在于法院受理环境公益诉讼案件的动力机制存在缺陷:法律依据不足、专门环境诉讼机制缺位,法院排斥群体性诉讼,环保法庭的制度突破难以获得法官群体的广泛认同.因此,必须从完善环境公益诉讼的法律依据、构建系统的环境诉讼机制体系、进行专业培训和环境问题的社会建构等几个方面开发与重塑法院受理环境公益诉讼案件的动力机制.     

THE EMERGENCE OF TRIAGE IN FAMILY COURT SERVICES: THE BEGINNING OF THE END FOR MANDATORY MEDIATION?*

Mandatory mediation has, since its inception in the 1980s, been at the heart of family court service agencies. However, changing times, more complex family problems, and a lack of court resources have created significant service delivery challenges. This article examines the emergence of variations of triage processes in family court service agencies as a response and contends that it is time to consider replacing the tiered service delivery model.     

Rush-hour traffic: self-presentation of defendants in speedy traffic court cases

Much work examines self-presentation styles; however, little work explores how people present themselves in traffic court. Utilizing observatory research, we aim to better understand differences in physical presentation and demeanor in traffic court. Further, judges that work in traffic court were interviewed to see how they understood the importance of presentation of self. Data indicate that most of those who appear in traffic court aim to present themselves professionally and behave with respect while in court. This appears to be a wise decision because judges tended to think that presentation of self was an important variable in their courtroom and how they evaluated cases. Still, differences in presentation of self appeared in the courtroom especially with regard to dress – extremely casual to orange jumpsuits. Finally, we argue that while modern defendants aim to present professionally the overall ‘professional’ presentation of self, even in the courtroom, is casual dress.     

SUPERVISED VISITATION A Profile of Providers

Surveys with 94 administrators of supervised visitation programs, 51 family court judges, and 40 administrators of child protective services agencies provide a national picture of supervised visitation services, their utility, and areas of unmet need. Although the programs are perceived to fill an important need, they struggle to survive financially, particularly those that handle family court cases. In addition, because many programs operate without adequate access to the assessment and treatment services that some families need, judges frequently want visitation supervisors to assist them in determining suitable custody and visitation arrangements, a role that supervised visitation programs do not feel is appropriate. Many different types of entities provide effective supervised visitation services; many different service formats work. Architects of new programs should fashion services that use local resources to maximum advantage.     

FAMILY COURT REFORM IN SIX PENNSYLVANIA COUNTIES

This article describes judicial behavior in local family court reform movements, vis-à-vis six case studies, as part of a larger study on the implementation of court-connected custody mediation in Pennsylvania. Research findings provide new insight into the initiation of change by judges at the local court level. When motivated to do so, family court judges in Pennsylvania bring about local reform independently and expeditiously. Judges who desire alternative methods to litigation of custody disputes implement court change with few organizational constraints: They decide how and when reform is to be implemented, and they assign nonjudicial professionals to assist in reform implementation. Finally, judges establish their own criteria for assessing the success of change initiated. Throughout reform movements, judges take on a variety of roles in bringing about change—first as reform activists, then as leaders in reform movements, and finally, as advisors in reform implementation. These case studies reveal the diversity in judicial style when court change is implemented; at the same time, similar court goals and objectives are obtained.     

THE BEST SEAT IN THE HOUSE: THE COURT ASSIGNMENT AND JUDICIAL SATISFACTION

A survey of 355 judges examined the differences in judicial satisfaction between those assigned to problem-solving courts—such as drug treatment and unified family—and judges in other more traditional assignments such as family law and criminal courts. The unified family court systems, like drug treatment courts, have generally adopted the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence. Significant differences were found on each of the three survey scales: (1) helpfulness, (2) attitude toward litigants, and (3) positive effects of assignment. The judges who were in the problem-solving courts (drug treatment and unified family court) scored higher on all three scales than those who were not (traditional family and criminal court). The group of problem-solving court judges consistently scored higher than the other group of judges, with the drug treatment court judges scoring the highest. The group of traditional criminal court and family court judges scored less positively, with the criminal court judges having the lowest scores. The problem-solving court judges were more likely to report believing that the role of the court should include helping litigants address the problems that brought them there and were more likely to observe positive changes in the litigants. They were also more likely to believe that litigants are motivated to change and are able to do so. They felt more respected by the litigants and were more likely to think that the litigants were grateful for help they received. The problem-solving court judges were also more likely to report being happy in their assignments and to believe that these assignments have a positive emotional effect on them.     

英美两国刑事法官的证据调查权评析

人们长期认为,英美法系的法官在法庭上一般是消极、被动地听审,却不能积极调查证据。事实上,英美两国的立法与审判实践却表明:法官可以询问证人、传唤证人出庭,或进行"庭外勘验"。尤其在没有陪审团参与的审判中,法官能更加主动地调查证据。这说明,英美两国的刑事法官并非完全消极、被动,特别是当庭审主体变为一元的职业法官时,他因对案件事实最终负责,而更加具有调查证据的天然冲动。由此可见,中国刑事法官在庭审中无需亦不能塑造成纯粹的仲裁者角色,而应保留适当的且受到法律合理规制的证据调查权。     

PARTICIPANTS’ EVALUATIONS OF ASPECTS OF THE LEGAL CHILD CUSTODY PROCESS AND PREFERENCES FOR COURT SERVICES

Domestic relations courts continue to experience large caseloads. As the volume of cases in which families are in crisis continues to grow, policy makers, practitioners, judges, and attorneys struggle to meet the growing demand and seek more effective ways to address the needs and issues of those who are engaged in child custody processes. The present study provides an examination of parent attitudes concerning various aspects of the legal process and preferences concerning a variety of court‐based family services and interventions.     

Judges’ views on evidence of genetic contributions to mental disorders in court

This preliminary analysis assesses how judges view the use of behavioral genetics evidence on genetic influences to mental disorders in court. Twenty-one semi-structured interviews, analyzed using constant comparative analysis, were conducted with California trial court judges. Most judges reported the beneficial effects of this evidence being presented in court, particularly as a mitigating factor for sentencing. Yet some judges viewed it as an aggravating factor and expressed concerns about genetic privacy. Judges described initial reactions to being potentially presented with evidence on genetic influences to mental disorders as apprehension, curiosity, and sympathy. Judges also reported putting significant trust in experts on these issues. Findings suggest some judges are skeptical of this evidence, but largely open to its presentation. Sympathetic reactions may result in mitigating attitudes of some judges. As judges significantly trust experts, some judges could also be overly trusting of genetic evidence and expert opinion on these issues.     

FAMILY COURTS-20 YEARS AFTER REFORM

The Rt. Hon. Dame Elias discusses the changes the people of Australia and New Zealand have seen and can expect from their respective family courts. She goes on to say that if judges of the family court are to play a more positive role in society, they need to stay abreast of what is happening with current legal trends as they relate to the "best interest of the child" standard, equal rights (especially between genders), and changing international trends in family law. The Chief Justice also addresses problems concerning lack of legal aid funding and an increase in unrepresented litigants. The Chief Justice explains that these issues and problems can best be dealt with through legislative reform as well as family court reform. Where there is an influx of additional resources better preparing judges to deal specifically with those seeking justice in the family court, these additional resources should also lead to a greater general understanding of current trends in the community. Chief Justice Elias asserts that without community support, these issues cannot be resolved.     

UNIFIED FAMILY COURTS

Fragmented court systems are especially problematic for domestic violence victims because they typically are involved in more than one proceeding that stems from the same pattern of abuse. The proceedings are handled in different courts and before different judges, who are often unaware of these orders being issued in other proceedings. Consequently, conflicting orders are prevalent and the protection and needs of victims are often not met. A unified family court, on the other hand, provides one court with the subject-matter jurisdiction to handle all family-related matters and one judge to hear all cases that involve a single family, resulting in conflicting orders being issued less frequently. Additionally, the needs of victims are better served as a result of the services component. Given the fragmented state of the court systems in New York and Pennsylvania, United States; Alberta, Canada; and Australia, unified family courts should be implemented in each locality.     

欧洲国家宪法法官制度初论

在20世纪,欧洲生成并发展出颇具特色的宪法法院制度,宪法法官作为宪法法院的决策主体承担了保障宪政生活中的合宪性这一重要使命。它们普遍建立了精英型宪法法官体系,通过任命机制控制宪法法官构成,使之具有合理性;同时,它们极力保障宪法法官的独立性,为其提供充分的权利保障及物质支持,并通过严格规范职业行为来保障宪法法官有效履行职责。     

Observations of reintegrative shaming in a mental health court

This study compares the use of stigmatizing and reintegrative shame - as specified in Braithwaite's Crime, shame and reintegration (1989) - across traditional criminal court and mental health court settings. Items from the Global Observational Ratings Instrument were used to gather data on 87 traditional court cases and 91 mental health court cases, presided over by five different judges. The observational items capture three constructs: respect, disapproval, and forgiveness, as they apply to Braithwaite's theory. We present means tests to examine differences in shaming between court types and judges. Findings show that the mental health court is more likely to use reintegrative shaming and show respect and forgiveness for offenders, and less likely to show disapproval. Similarly, judges who preside in both court types are significantly more likely to practice reintegrative shaming in the mental health court context. We further explore these findings using field notes and illustrate those components of a mental health court that are conducive to reintegrative shaming.     

QUESTIONS ABOUT FAMILY COURT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SCREENING AND ASSESSMENT

Increasingly, family courts are seeking ways to focus limited resources on cases that require the most intervention, tailor court responses and dispute methods to each case, and account for the real differences among domestic violence cases. One of the means to that end may be the triaging or screening of cases. This article raises a number of questions about screening and urges that they be addressed by courts and communities that are considering whether and how to design a screening protocol. Issues include: How should we define domestic violence for the purposes of screening? Who should carry out the screening? How can we maximize the likelihood that we will fully assess the context of the violence in each case? How should we assess the risks or dangers inherent in the parties’ situation? How should a screening effort account for changing circumstances as a case proceeds through the courts? How can information gathered in a screening effort improperly impact subsequent decisions of the court?     

The Impact of Court Delays on the Prosecutor and the Defendant: An Economic Analysis

One important aspect of the economic theory of criminal court delay is to understand how the prosecutor and the defendant make their decisions, and how these respond to changes in trial delay. If both parties jointly maximise expected utility, trial delay may increase or decrease the number of trials, depending upon the decision makers' attitudes towards risk. The main policy implication is that providing the criminal courts with more resources in the form of additional judges and court capacity may lengthen the trial queue rather than shorten it. This is a counterintuitive result contrary to popular belief.     

“YOUTH IS ENMESHED IN A HIGHLY DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILY SYSTEM”: EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP AMONG DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILIES,PARENTAL INCARCERATION,AND JUVENILE COURT DECISION MAKING*

Although prior work has substantiated the role of external attributes in juvenile court decision making, no study to date has examined how family situational factors as well as maternal and paternal incarceration affect juvenile court officials' responses to troubled youth. Using quantitative and qualitative juvenile court data from a large urban county in the southwest, this study draws on attribution theory to examine how family structure, perceptions of family dysfunction, and parental incarceration influence out‐of‐home placement decisions. Findings reveal that juvenile court officials' perceptions of good and bad families inform their decision making. This study emphasizes the need to unravel the intricate effects of maternal and paternal incarceration and officials' attributions about families and family structure on juvenile court decision making.