Rosengarten - Juvenile General Evidence - VBI 2010

Rosengarten - Juvenile General Evidence - VBI 2010 - SDA...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: SDA Debate R OSENGARTEN J UVENILES : G ENERAL E VIDENCE VBI 2010 File Title Article 1 Thesis I contend that the cultural and ideological assumptions that underpin the current two-tiered justice system not only engender many of the serious shortcomings of the juvenile justice system, but also serve to exacerbate the very policies and practices of the adult criminal justice system that make it so abhorrent to defenders of the juvenile court What I am advocating is, in fact, the abolition of "adult court" with all the assumptions entailed by its necessary contrast with juvenile court. In proposing the abolition of a separate juvenile court and its replacement with a unified criminal court system, I plead for a radical rethinking of the entire criminal justice system, making it more responsive to the characteristics of all those it touches, regardless of age. Article 1 Thesis.............................................................................................................................................................................1 AFF [UQ] - JUVENILE SYSTEM SUCKS.......................................................................................................................................3 The juvenile criminal justice system is inferior, leaving the juvenile in worse procedural circumstance. .....................................3 AFF A2: REHABILITATION GOOD/SOLVES................................................................................................................................4 Rehabilitation institutions are experienced as punishment and they dont have the resource necessary to make meaningful individualized intervention. ..........................................................................................................................................................4 NEG BENEFIT STATES SPREAD EFFECTIVE LAWS...............................................................................................................6 Lack of federal mandate allows states to be autonomous and experimentalists, thereby inspiring legal evolution in other states. .....................................................................................................................................................................................................6 NEG IMPACT DEMOCRATIC REPRESENTATIVENESS ..........................................................................................................7 Horizontal federalism undercuts the democratic representativeness of the criminal law. This turns officials intro free riders and forsakes states autonomy............................................................................................................................................................7 NEG UNIQUENESS STATES HAVE DIFFERENT LAWS...........................................................................................................8 This is uniqueness........................................................................................................................................................................8This is uniqueness....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/21/2011 for the course ECONOMICS 302 taught by Professor Wayne during the Spring '11 term at Wayne State University.

Page1 / 11

Rosengarten - Juvenile General Evidence - VBI 2010 - SDA...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online