The oral argument in court today focused on the severity of the penalty and the lack of protections that the law allows. For example, a high school student who is at a friend’s house working on a class project that takes them into the evening can be arrested on his way home — even if he has his parent’s permission to be out.
The lawyer for the defendants pointed out that his clients were doing nothing illegal besides just being out past 11:00. The judges seemed concerned about the state crossing the line of parents’ right to set rules for their children. Cities and towns across the country have been enacting juvenile curfews as a way to curb juvenile crime. However, as the court pointed out today, all of the reliable data shows that juvenile crime spikes in the hours right after school lets out, and dies down significantly during the evening hours.
A ruling is expected soon. To see the ACLU of Massachusetts brief, go to:
http://www.aclum.org/legal/commonwealth_v_ai_and_aw_juveniles/brief.pdf
However, I don’t see the concept of a curfew for minors as inherently unconstitutional. Minors’ rights are almost never as absolute as adults. If the law is known, its simply a matter of avoiding violating it. Extenuating circumstances can always be addressed at a hearing. As for the parents’ right to set rules, I’ve heard enough stories as a substitute teacher to know that quite frankly there are parents that don’t know how to.
<
p>Would you have a similar respect for the parents’ if this minor was trying to get an abortion rather than be out late at night?