Not a Subscriber? Register Now

June 19, 2013

Latest News

Teen Curfew Laws Challenged

April 30, 2009 by Matt Wagner

New York's highest court heard arguments April 28 on a challenge to the city of Rochester's juvenile curfew, the first such case to reach the state's high court. A challenge to a similar curfew in Lowell, Mass., was heard by that state's Supreme Judicial Court on April 6. Rulings in both cases could come within weeks.

The court challenges come at a time when curfew laws appear to be spreading, even in the face of research that says they don't cut teen crime

Rochester attorneys defended its curfew before the Court of Appeals as a public safety measure that reduces juvenile violence and saves live. Rochester officials enacted the curfew, which applies to youths ages 17 and under from 11 p.m. to 5 a.m. on weekdays and midnight to 5 a.m. on weekends, after seven youths were killed in the city in 2005.

Michael Burger, the attorney for the Rochester father and his teenage son who challenged the curfew (Anonymous v. City of Rochester), argued that the ordinance enabled police to arrest and interrogate a disproportionate percentage of minorities. Burger told the court that 94 percent of the 709 youths picked up on curfew violations were black or Hispanic, according to the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle.

The case reached the high court after a state Appellate Divisions court struck down the curfew in October, ruling that it had not been shown to cut youth crime. The court cited the city's own crime statistics that show juveniles are much more likely to commit crimes during hours that are not covered by the curfew. The divided panel also said that the curfew law was unconstitutional because it unduly restricted the plaintiff's freedom of movement and expression.

Earlier this month, the high court in Massachusetts heard a challenge to a nearly identical ordinance enacted in the Boston suburb of Lowell in 1994 to curtail gang violence. Two men who were arrested four years ago as 16-year-olds for violating the town's curfew brought the case (Commonwealth v. A.W. and another). One of the boys, who was visiting from Somerville, Mass., was arrested on his way to the police station to ask for directions, and the other was walking home with his older brother, the Lowell Sun reported. The names of the men are being withheld because they were juveniles at the time of the arrests.

Lowell officials contended that the curfew is a key tool for limiting gang violence and emphasized that police officers usually call parents to pick up their children rather than arresting the youths. But James Sultan, the attorney for the two men, argued that the curfew violates First Amendment rights and assigns the state responsibilities that are better left to parents, according to The Boston Globe.

Youth curfews, which are commonly employed by cities across the country to curb youth violence, have provoked legal challenges in other states, including Oregon, New Jersey and Alaska. State and federal appeals courts have differed in their rulings on the issue. In 1998, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of a federal curfew case that originated in Virginia.

Comments

You must Login before leaving a comment.

Comment by: tyson on June 30, 2010

we might as well just put a curfew on everyone under 18, from 12 midnight to 12 midnight, cuz i heard about some kid killing someone at 4 in the afternoon, so kids out during the day must arise a lot of problems. teenagers should just all stay inside 24/7, learn a bunch of inside stuff, until they turn 18 and then they can finally go outside and enjoy the fresh air, cuz everybody knows that an 18 year old isn't gonna kill anyone, or promote any kind of illegal activity, especially after 1 am. curfews are bull shit.

Comment by: Linnea on June 26, 2010

A teenager has just as much of a right to be out at 2 AM as anybody else. Maybe they like going for long walks or runs late at night or very early in the morning. Maybe they like to go to the park in the middle of the night to swing on the swings. Maybe they like going to late movies. Maybe they are just generally a night owl.

Whatever the case, a teenager does not have to justify him/herself to you. Your neighbor's teenage kid does not owe you an explanation for his/her actions.

The idea that a teen "has no business being out at 2 AM" is extremely presumptuous. What your neighbor or your neighbor's kid does is none of your business. You do not have the right to dictate when it is appropriate for someone else's kid to be outside.

What a teen is doing out at 2 AM is nobody's business except their own, and their parents'. It's not up to the government to decide when a child should be home. That decision is up to the teen and his/her parents.

I've even heard some people say that teen curfews are a good idea because growing teens really need their sleep! HA! It's nice that some people are apparently oh-so concerned about teens getting enough sleep at night. But again, how much sleep a teen gets is not the government's business...or anyone else's, except for the teen's and his/her family's.

If a parent needs to know their daughter/son is safe, then they can enact their own curfew. They don't need the government to do it for them.

To pre-emptively restrict someone from being outside their home, just because they MIGHT commit a crime or cause trouble, is unjustifiable. We don't put such restrictions on people unless they've already been convicted of a crime or crimes (parolees, for example, have many restrictions put upon them regarding where they have to be and when). To tell someone that they are too "dangerous" to be allowed out at night -- when you don't know a single thing about them besides their age -- is ludicrous.

And, to enact a law that applies only to a specific demographic group or groups is inherently unconstitutional. It is a WHOPPING violation of a person's civil liberties. If someone tried to enact a law that said that black people, or women, or the elderly, must be inside their homes from 10 PM to 6 AM, it would never fly. So why is it okay for teenagers?

No one has yet enacted a law making it illegal for elderly people to drive, despite the obvious prudency of doing so. Even though making it illegal for seniors to drive could greatly reduce the number of auto accidents that happen when people who are too old to drive attempt to do so, we don't do it. Why? Because it's wrong. Because it's wrong, and because, unlike teenagers, elderly people can vote against the passing of such laws.

But, morality and constitutionality aside, there is no valid evidence whatsoever to support the idea that teen curfews help reduce nighttime crime and/or disturbances. The only "evidence" anyone can provide is either anecdotal, manipulated and/or misinterpreted statistics, and/or convoluted reasoning that has no basis in logic or even common sense.

We get along just fine without a teen curfew here in New York City. In fact, New York City is currently the safest city in the United States.

And, as many people have already mentioned, if someone is already out to commit an illegal act, like robbery, vandalism, assault, rape, then do you really think a curfew will stop them? If someone is already planning to break the laws against robbery and assault, then why would they decide to follow the curfew law?

In sum, teen curfews are unfair, unconstitutional, totally unnecessary, and completely ineffective.

And by the way, sevi and Brandon Maxadia, the majority of crimes committed by teens are committed during the hours of 2 PM to 8 PM. NOT in the middle of the night. Source: http://www.youthrights.org/curfewfaq.php

And in fact, teenagers commit the LEAST crime of any demographic group, except for the elderly! (Source: same as above). The idea that teenage crime is rampant is a total lie.

And teens don't need to be protected from crime any more than adults do. If a teen is afraid of being attacked or robbed at night, then they can stay in voluntarily. I mean, if we need curfews to protect people from crime, then why don't we just make a national curfew for everyone, where everyone in America has to be in their homes from 10 PM to 6 AM?

Comment by: tiki $ on May 18, 2010

i agree yahoo

Comment by: Darius Palmer on April 20, 2010

yea i agree becuz curfews are stupid becuz ur parents wouldnt have worry bout were you been and all dat other stuff if they brought you up the right way and not wrong way then they have nothin to worry bout and yea i am 14

Comment by: shelby on March 29, 2010

curfew is pointless. it is supposed to keep kids from doing bad things but if the kids are out there doing drugs and all that obviously the consequence for doing that is far more worse than being late for curfew. if they dont follow the "no drug or drinking" rule i dont think they will folllow their curfew either. cops shouldnt be able to tell all kids to have such an early curfew if they have no record of doing anything bad. it should be up to the parents to make the rules for their children. after all, they do know their own kids better than some random cop.

Comment by: shelby on March 29, 2010

Comment by: Cameron on March 04, 2010

i hate curfew. me and my friends skate late at nite, we do nothing bad and cops always show up take r info and drive us home... i am strongly against curfew i think ppl 12 and under shuld hav curfew but evry 1 else is smart enough 2 take care of them selvs

Comment by: jessika on February 12, 2010

some people on this need to more understanding.... on this and yeahh kids dont want a curfew but kids need some direct order sometimes soo it is good we have on every once in a while

Comment by: Jennifer on February 12, 2010

I'm picking this article for my enlgish class.

Comment by: Jane on December 02, 2009

I think that curfews aren't called for. Teens actions are their own so the consequences belong to them also. Ashley seriously you can't save the world all you have to do is report abuse when you see something your offended by. TEEN CURFEWS SHOULD STOP NOW! THEIR ACTIONS= THEIR CONSEQUENCES!

Comment by: Ashley on November 30, 2009

Please dont leave meant and unnessisary comments.This is not youtube.Be serius because teens could look here for info on debates.:)

Comment by: jarvquieta jones on November 23, 2009

who u talkin bout them? u racist

Comment by: Caysea Syone on November 10, 2009

I strongly disagree!!! if kids are going to do bad things then 1. a stupid curfew isn't going to stop them. 2. even if they wanted to do other bad things they can do it in the daylight. nothing is going to stop[ them!

Comment by: Brandon Maxadia on November 02, 2009

Aye doe, that's ridiculous. And why you typin every word with a capital letter? Anyways.. yeah i think curfew should be put in place and parents have the right to tell their kids when to be home. Yeah im 16 too and i just think you're tryin to be hardcore by "not listening to yo parents". you're cool. Maybe you just have no character and need to find something to do to keep your attitude right. like a sport or something. Yeah crimes happen during the day, but honestly, if you were going to commit a crime, would you do it in broad daylight or when its late and most people are asleep and not watching you? think about it. peace doe.

Comment by: Devinn Harris. on October 28, 2009

Naw Doe. I Don't Thing There Should Be A Curfew For Kids 16 And Over. Clearly Because When You Tell A Child That They Have To Be In The House At A Certain Times Makes Them Refuse And Disobey The Law. Only Beacause They Don't Want To Be Told What To Do. I Am A 16 Year Old And I Don't Wanna Be Told, "Hey, You Have To Be In The House At 12am". That's Crazy. So I Don't Think There Should Be A Curfew For Children Un 16. And They Say That Curfew Stops Violence, When Clearly Itr Doesn't. Kids Are Dying, Getting Hurt, Cause Problems, And Doing Grand-Theft In The Day Light Too. I Just Don't Understand.

Comment by: Js on October 19, 2009

But Sevi, simply being out at night does not make a teen a murderer or a druggie. Why should being out late be automatically labelled "wrong", and what business is it of cops to assign consequences to an action which in itself is not harming others? If a teen is murdering/pillaging/what have you, then yes, that is wrong, but what harm is a teen doing by simply being there? It should be up to the parents to decide how late their teen should stay out, and up to the parents to decide what the consequences are.

As evidenced by the article, teens who are not doing anything wrong can easily be labeled as a criminal because they happen to be underage and out at the wrong time. Does walking home really call for an arrest or a fine? Furthermore, if one of these kids really was out to do drugs, kidnap, or murder someone, do you really think a curfew law would stop them?

Comment by: sevi on September 25, 2009

i strongly agree with curfew,because guess what more drug,killing's and kidnapping happen at night.So if the police catch the kids doing wrong, then they have consequences for what they did/do.

Comment by: Janie Clemens on July 14, 2009 curfew does nothing to curb kids from crimes, because guess what? hardly any kids know about them, besides their driving curfew.and really you think teenagers give a crap about some curfew. yea right. if they are going to do something bad, a curfew sure as heck wont stop them.

Comment by: Dontarious Sylvester on May 27, 2009 I think curfew for kids 12 and under 9:00. Kids 12 and older should be till 11:00.

Latest News Articles

Ed Finkel | 06/19/13Agencies: Diversity Essential to Maximizing Outrea... Read More

James Swift | 06/18/13Two 'Cool Girls' Beat the Odds... Read More

James Swift | 06/18/13Consistency and Commitment Key to Successful Mento... Read More

James Swift | 06/18/13Who are the Class of 2013?... Read More

Youth Today Staff | 06/18/13California School Systems Now Accountable for Fost... Read More

Lisa Pilnik | 06/17/13Resources for Professionals to Help Prevent Second... Read More

Lisa Pilnik | 06/17/13Helping Can Hurt... Read More

Lisa Pilnik | 06/17/13How to Reduce the Risk of Secondary Trauma ... Read More

Latest Tweets From Youth Today

Justice for Sara

written by John Lash | 06/14/2013

Have you heard Sara’s story? She was raised by an abusive, drug addicted mother. Her father was almost entirely absent from their lives. Sara, an 11-year-old middle school student in Riverside, Calif., met a man in his thirties who began to take a fatherly interest in her. He would take her and her friends skating, buy her gifts, offer her advice, and over a few years become a father figure. Things were looking up. Then, when she was 13, he raped her. The ma...