YOUTH CURFEW: BALANCING THE RIGHTS OF YOUTH AND ADULT & SAFETY OF YOUTH AND THE SOCIETY

INTRODUCTIONDepending on the country, other examples can be
At the heart of democracy is the idea thatsmoking or drinking in public, running away from
citizens are equal before the law. In elections,home, or not being in school during a normal
every citizen gets only one vote. When citizensschool day.
are charged with crimes or believe their rightsThe United States is the current leader in
have been violated, they expect equal treatmentlegislating and enforcing curfew laws. These laws
in the courts whether they are rich or poor,are usually passed and enforced by state or local
religious or atheist, politicians or political activists.governments. During the 1990s, thousands of
Every democratic society must strive to grantAmerican cities and towns, including nearly
equal protection to its citizens. Yet one significantthree-fourths of all cities with more than 100,000
community of citizens is the focus of many lawsinhabitants, enacted youth curfew laws. These
but has no formal way to shape those laws:laws were part of a response to the increase in
youth. Children and adolescents are a vital part ofjuvenile crime that occurred in the United States
every nation. They are subject to society’sbetween 1988 and 1992. During those four years,
rules, but they are treated differently under thejuvenile homicide increased 55 percent. Forcible
law precisely because of their age. They cannotrape increased 27 percent, and aggravated
vote, nor do they have many of the privilegesassault jumped 80 percent. Young people under
and responsibilities of older citizens. Instead, laws16 were responsible for 62 percent of violent
are passed to help and protect them or tojuvenile offenses, but statistics also showed that
protect the larger society. One of these laws isteenagers were the most frequent targets of
the youth curfew.juvenile violence. Curfew laws enacted in the
ANALYSIS ON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA1990s were aimed at reducing juvenile crime and
CURFEW LAWS[1]preventing youth victimization.
Curfew laws have been challenged on a varietySeveral European democracies have imposed
of constitutional grounds. Although some maydifferent versions of youth curfews. In Britain, a
argue juveniles do not have constitutional rights,1998 law allowed local councils to impose curfews
the Supreme Court in many cases has ruled thatfor all children under ten. A Scottish program
people have constitutional rights regardless of age.mandates police officers to stop young people on
Often these cases have involved issues ofthe streets at night and divert them towards
students' rights in schools. Tinker v. Des Moinesyouth activities available at clubs set up by the
School District in 1969 ruled that students had thelocal council. Serbia has debated extending
right to freedom of speech in schools.[2] Thiswartime curfew policies for young people only.
case involved how school officials had forbidden aCurfews also have been introduced in Australia. In
group of students from carrying out theirthe city of Perth, Australian lawmakers recently
symbolic protest of the Vietnam War by wearingimposed a curfew for a year; they report that
black armbands. The constitutional rights of youngthe curfew has reduced crime and antisocial
people have been affirmed in many other cases,behavior. Curfew laws in the United States have
such as their religious freedom in schools, wherebeen challenged by the American Civil Liberties
religious activity is allowed as long as it is studentUnion (ACLU). ACLU lawyers argue that the
led. In the case Missouri v. Danforth in 1976, itcurfew law violates young people’s rights
was directly stated that people have fullunder the U.S. Constitution, including freedom of
constitutional rights regardless of age. In thespeech and peaceful assembly, freedom from
court's opinion:unreasonable detainment, fair treatment under the
Constitutional rights do not mature and come intolaw, and the right to travel.
being magically only when one attains theNot surprisingly, different challenges to local
state-defined age of majority.[3]curfew laws in the United States have yielded
Although young people are subject to a largedifferent results. A federal court declared that the
number of restrictions based upon age, the judicialcurfew law in the city of Dallas, Texas, was
system has a long precedent for people havingunconstitutional. The city appealed this decision to
full constitutional rights regardless of age.a higher court, and that court ruled that the Dallas
The Supreme Court has long recognized that thecurfew was constitutional because it had the
rights of freedom of speech and assembly gopotential to reduce juvenile crime and victimization.
hand in hand. In order to voice opinion, it isThe higher court also ruled that certain exceptions
sometimes necessary to gather protests, and thein the curfew law provided young people and their
only way to accomplish this is if there is freedomparents with enough freedom to move about
to gather in public as long as it is peaceful. Theafter curfew hours. Many other communities
fourteenth amendment also guarantees that statefollowed Dallas’s example and established
and local governments cannot take away firstcurfew laws. In 2001, however, curfew laws were
amendment rights. Many curfew laws, however,successfully challenged in the states of Alaska,
have exceptions written in them that allowNew Jersey, New York, and elsewhere. In those
offenders to be exempt if they are involved in acases, curfew laws were found to violate the
political protest. The importance of the use ofconstitutional rights of young people and their
public property such as streets and parks forparents.
conducting political speech has been protected byBalancing Rights and Safety
freedom of assembly under the first amendmentMost arguments about youth curfews address
since Hague v. CIO, 307 U.S. 496 in 1939. Thistwo main ideas: (1) the safety of youth and
case involved a group of people denied permitssociety and (2) the rights of youth and adults.
from the police for holding a meeting in a building1. The Safety of Young People and Society.
in Jersey City for allegedly being communist. TheAdvocates claim that youth curfews can help
city ordinance required anyone conducting aprotect vulnerable children. Most parents, they
speech advocating obstruction of government tosay, are responsible, but many cannot supervise
obtain a permit through the police station beforetheir children, who may then fall victim to street
getting a lease to any hall or building forcrime and accidents. Curfews, they say, can
conducting the speech.[4] However, in Cox v.protect under supervised children and help parents
Louisiana, 379 U.S. 536, 554 , 464 (1965), it wasface up to their responsibilities. Supporters also
ruled states may impose reasonable regulationsclaim that youth curfews can challenge negative
upon assembly. In the opinion of the court:youth attitudes in areas where defying the law is
One would not be justified in ignoring the familiarconsidered desirable and gang membership is a
red light because this was thought to be a meansstatus symbol. Curfews encourage young people
of social protest. Nor could one, contrary toto spend more time with their families and in
traffic regulations, insist upon a street meeting inmore positive activities, such as sports and youth
the middle of Times Square at the rush hour as aclubs.
form of freedom of speech or assembly.People opposed to curfews argue that curfews
However, the regulatory measures must belimit the rights of parents to bring up their children
narrowly defined to reach only the legitimateas they choose. Requiring adults to accompany
objectives of the state regulation. While thetheir children to outside activities is unreasonable
Supreme Court's interpretation of freedom ofand prejudicial because many adults don’t
speech is broad, its interpretation of freedom ofbelieve they need to—or are unable
assembly appears to be narrow.to—transport their children around the
Curfew laws directly remove the right tocommunity.
assemble in public, and many times even onAdvocates of youth curfews also believe that
private, property. The constitutionality of youththese laws provide communities with fair and
curfew laws has yet to be tested in the Supremepositive means to reduce juvenile violence.
Court. Lower courts are divided over the issue,Juvenile crime is a serious problem that often
many ruling unconstitutional, and many rulinginvolves drugs and violence. Gangs can terrorize
constitutional. The Supreme Court has only evercommunities and create a social climate in which
had one case to do with a curfew law in history,criminal activity becomes the norm. Youth
Kiyoshi Hirabayashi v. United States in 1943. Thiscurfews deal with these problems by keeping
case was concerning the curfew imposed uponyoung people off the street and preventing them
Japanese during World War II. It was upheldfrom congregating in the hours of darkness.
because the court felt constitutional rights wereOpponents of youth curfews are not convinced
less applicable in times of war.that such programs actually work. They point to
General curfews have often been imposed as astudies that show no direct link exists between
response to an emergency, such as riots, andjuvenile crime rates and the enforcement of
they usually were implemented only a few daysyouth curfews. Instead, these studies show other
to a few weeks. The key difference is that theyfactors (for example, population shifts and
are intended from the start to be temporary,economic changes) have more impact on youth
whereas youth curfews are intended to becrime than do curfews. Additionally, these studies
permanent. A general curfew, which applied to allfound that most juvenile crime takes place
citizens to respond to a temporary emergency,between 3 p.m. and 8 p.m.—after students are
was appealed to the Supreme Court in Janetreleased from school and before working parents
Stotland v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.[6]return home—rather than during curfew hours.
They refused to hear the case. However, JusticeYouth curfews, say their advocates, can support
Douglas dissented arguing that curfew laws mayzero-tolerance policing. This strategy is based on
be necessary when the security of the state isthe theory that low-level crimes such as
threatened, but they raised serious questionsgraffiti-tagging, window breaking, and drug dealing
about the right of assembly. He stated he was(all common juvenile offenses) can encourage
concerned about the possible abuse of curfewdevelopment of a lawless environment where
laws in clearing the public of "undesirable people,"more serious crimes can flourish. Opponents
such as minorities, and he argued a curfew lawsuggest that imposing youth curfews has great
should be temporary and narrowly defined.potential for abuse and may turn generally
The judicial system often applies a test to see iflaw-abiding young people into criminals. They note
a law is narrowly defined enough and does notthat more American children are charged with
give the authorities too much power. Many lowercurfew offenses than with any other crime. They
courts that ruled a youth curfew lawalso point out that statistics from U.S.
unconstitutional later ruled it constitutional aftercommunities suggest that the police arrest more
many exceptions were added into the law.non-white than white youth for curfew violations.
Although curfew laws violate constitutional rights,They also say that curfews affect the poor more
the courts ruling in favor of curfew laws stateharshly: because youth in poor neighborhoods
they have a "compelling state interest" ofhave fewer places to play or “hang out”
reducing juvenile crime and victimization. Fewsafely, their only option is staying on the streets.
people care about the rights of other people, andOnce burdened by a criminal record, many of
usually they only care about their own. Manythese young people cross a psychological
adults seem not care about the rights of youngboundary, perceiving themselves as outlaws. A
people at all, by making their mere presence illegal.criminal record reduces the employment
A survey conducted by Wichita State Universityopportunities for youth and scars their futures.
asking cities nationwide a variety of questionsEnforcement of youth curfews can lead to
concerning curfew laws found no city that didn'tdeterioration in police-youth relations.
have a curfew law specifying constitutional issues2. The Rights of Young and Older Citizens.
as a reason for not having it[7]. For theseOpponents of youth curfews say that these
reasons, the only aspect about curfew laws thatpolicies infringe upon the individual rights and
may really matter is if they are necessary, and ifliberties of young people. Children, they say, have
they do in fact accomplish their stated goals ofthe right to freedom of movement and assembly.
reducing juvenile crime and victimization thusCurfews hurt these rights. Young people,
having a "compelling state interest."particularly teenagers, have legitimate reasons to
Nationwide, the majority of cities with curfewbe out at night without adults. Many hold after
laws claim they are great successes in reducingschool jobs. Others participate in group activities
crime. In a survey done by the U.S. Conferenceat churches, youth clubs, or sports arenas.
of Mayors, it was found that the officials in 88%Young citizens cannot learn how to be responsible
of the cities with curfew laws believed that theyunless they have opportunities to act responsibly.
helped reduce juvenile crime.[8] However, asOpponents of curfews also note that this kind of
reported by the Los Angeles Times, the surveylaw treats all young people as potential law
"did not include a statistical analysis of the effectbreakers. While only 0.2 percent of youth in the
curfews have had on crime".[9] In addition, I wasUnited States commit serious offenses, youth
only able to find one study of the effectivenesscurfews limit the remaining 99.8 percent of young
of curfew laws that did a statistical hypothesispeople who seek to engage in legitimate activities
test that the level of curfew enforcement isduring nighttime hours. Moreover, curfew laws
negatively correlated with the level of other crime.tend to discriminate by age, despite the fact that
It was the only one to use the basic proceduresyoung people commit fewer crimes than adults.
of using controlled data and testing for statisticalSupporters of youth curfews agree that such
significance. Curfews have been around for a longprograms take the law-abiding majority of young
time, and the crime statistics to study them arepeople off the streets. They see this restriction,
readily available. The fact that virtually nohowever, as a protection and an advantage: it
research has been done, while so many peopleprotects law-abiding youth from law-breakers, and
are claiming curfew laws are great successes,it gives the police the advantage of focusing their
seems very irresponsible, and should lend itself toresources on only those few young people
skepticism. Although statistics are often used toactively breaking the law. Balancing the rights and
deceive, they're often the only way of measuringsafety needs of youth and adults remains a
the real world, if done properly. Law enforcementchallenge.
agencies that say they "observe" a decline inCONCLUSION
juvenile crime should explain exactly how theyIn early 2009 the Chief Minister of Perlis (Malaysia)
observe it. Law enforcement officials reportannounced his intention to enforce youth curfew.
whatever crime measure conveniently showsIt was intended to reduce crime rates and
crime has decreased. For example, the Office ofprevent youths from getting involved with
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention did aimmoral activities. However, his intention has been
study of curfew laws in 1996[10] and used crimeheavily criticized. Some agreed with him, including
victimization in some cities, arrest figures inthe Pemuda UMNO Perlis, but most disagreed.
others, and arrest figures for only selected crimesThe biggest challenge to enforcement of youth
in still others. It made no controlled comparisons,curfew is the Federal Constitution. It has been
and so it is useless for research purposes.[11]stated in many cases[13] and in the Federal
Youth Curfews: Protection or Punishment?Constitution itself that any subsidiary laws which
Youth curfew laws make it illegal for youngcontradict the Federal Constitution, the later shall
people, usually under age 16 or 17, to be on theprevail[14]. Hence, until the Federal Constitution is
streets during certain times, typically from 11:00amended, there is no guarantee for enforcement
p.m. to 4:00 a.m. These laws are part of a largerof youth curfew laws to be practicable in Malaysia.
group of “status offenses.” A status*original document has footnotes. Please e-mail
offense is something that is illegal when a youngme at if you would like to have a copy of this
person does it but legal when done by an adult.document.