Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division Thomas E. Perez Speaks at Shelby County, Tenn., Press Conference

We are here to discuss the results of our comprehensive investigation of the Juvenile Court of Memphis and Shelby County. Under federal laws, the Attorney General has the authority to investigate and take appropriate legal action to address and correct a pattern or practice of violations of the constitution or laws of the United States by government agencies responsible for the administration of juvenile justice.

In August 2009, the Justice Department began its investigation into allegations of due process and equal protection violations at the juvenile court and conditions of confinement at the juvenile detention center. Everyone has a shared interest in ensuring that the juvenile justice system in Memphis and Shelby County operates in a fair and constitutional manner. Our investigation focused on serious concerns brought to our attention by Shelby County residents and officials that children in the juvenile justice system were not receiving adequate due process protections, and that African-American children were being treated differently and more harshly.

Our investigation has been thorough and extensive. We toured the juvenile court in 2010 and 2011 with various experts in the juvenile justice field. We worked in collaboration with our partners at the U.S. Attorney’s office in Memphis, other sister agencies within the Department of Justice who have expertise in juvenile justice issues, including the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and the department’s Access to Justice Office. We observed hearings, met with court personnel, reviewed documents and hearing transcripts, and met with community stakeholders. Our expert examined the juvenile court’s case data- more than 66,000 files- over a five year period, to determine how children’s cases were handled.

Throughout this process, we received full cooperation of the juvenile court, and I want to thank Judge Curtis Person and his staff for their helpfulness and professionalism throughout the process. Judge Person did not await the conclusion of our investigation to initiate reforms, and I am grateful for these efforts.

Notwithstanding the progress we have observed in a number of areas, we found serious and systemic failures in the juvenile court system in Memphis and Shelby County that violate the constitutional rights of children appearing before the court. We found three separate categories of constitutional violations.

First, we found the juvenile court violates the due process rights of children throughout the juvenile justice process. This finding applies to proceedings that impact all children who appear before the court on delinquency matters, regardless of race. These due process violations include:

1) Failing to provide timely and adequate notice of charges to children in advance of their hearings. The insufficient notice interferes with the ability to prepare for important hearings such as, for example, the trial to determine whether the child is guilty of the delinquent act charged;

2) Failing to hold timely probable cause hearings for children arrested without a warrant by not holding those hearings on weekends and holidays. What this means is that children experience needlessly lengthy detentions before a Magistrate conducts a hearing to determine whether there was probable cause for their arrest;

3) Failing to protect children from self incrimination during critical hearings. It is well settled that Miranda protections apply in juvenile proceedings; we observed repeated failures to protect children from self incrimination; and

4) Failing to provide adequate due process protections for children before transferring them to the adult criminal court. We found Magistrates making transfer decisions after making cursory or no inquiries into the child’s background or social factors which is required by the State’s law, after failing to hold a waiver hearing at all, or conducting a cursory review. This violates the 14^th Amendment’s minimal requirements for transfer proceedings.

Second, we found that African-American children were treated differently during key points in the juvenile court process. We retained a nationally recognized expert to review the court’s data over a five year period. This analysis revealed that African-American children received disproportionately harsh treatment at different stages of the delinquency process.

In key phases of the process, we found that race was - in and of itself- a significant contributing factor, even after accountability for legal variables such as the nature of the charge, and prior records; and social variables such as age, gender and school attendance. Race was a statistically significant factor in determining whether a child would receive lenient treatment, such as a warning, or more serious sanction. 

•                      African-American children were one-third less likely to receive a warning than white children, even after accounting for other factors such as prior contacts with the court, severity of the charges, gender and education.

•                      An African-American child was more than twice as likely to be detained as a white child, even after controlling for other legal and social factors.