SALEM, Ore. - The long state legislative session has been full of promises to reform Oregon's criminal justice system, putting more focus on crime prevention and less on locking people up. Now, advocates for young offenders say all but a handful might be left out of that reform effort, in a compromise crafted to appease District Attorneys.

The Governor's Commission on Public Safety recommended allowing young people to earn a judge's review of their sentence after serving most of their time. But according to David Rogers, executive director of the Partnership for Safety and Justice, the compromise deal is much more narrow.

"The governor's office seems to be supporting a watered-down earned-review policy that will impact a very tiny number of youth, maybe eight to ten young people," Rogers charged. "And he expects that doing that, he'll be able to get away with saying that he's done something."

Rogers said the idea of allowing judges more discretion in juvenile cases has had bipartisan support among lawmakers, and also in a poll of Oregon voters taken two months ago.

If the Commission's recommendations are bypassed, Oregon will be bucking a national trend that includes 20 years of juvenile justice research. Liz Ryan, president of the Campaign for Youth Justice, explained that the new focus in many states is on rehabilitation and ensuring that a young person doesn't re-offend.

"A number of states have taken steps to change their laws: removing kids from automatic prosecution in adult criminal court, giving judges more discretion on whether or not to transfer kids to adult court, and also removing kids from adult jails and prisons," she said. "This session, we don't want Oregon to get left behind."

Ryan added that just this year, four more states changed their laws to ensure that juveniles are treated differently and separately from adults in the court system.

In Oregon, Rogers is concerned that members of the Joint Legislative Committee on Public Safety might accept the compromise, even if they aren't happy with it.

"Many of them would like to see their very hard work not totally wasted," he said. "So I think that, because time is of the essence here, the co-chairs of the committee are essentially inclined to take something rather than nothing."

The legislative session concludes at the end of June.



get more stories like this via email

Advocates of criminal-justice reform warn the passage of Proposition 36 will mean a sharp reduction in funds to anti-crime initiatives. The measure raises the penalties for certain drug and theft crimes, making more of them felonies that carry jail time.

Will Matthews, a spokesperson for Californians for Safety and Justice, a nonprofit public-safety advocacy organization, said voters were fed false promises that Prop. 36 would reduce property crime by forcing more people to choose between treatment and incarceration.

"It really was a disingenuous initiative that now will result in billions of dollars being diverted away from treating addiction, treating mental illness, and helping folks coming home from a period of incarceration," he said.

Prop. 36 repeals parts of Proposition 47, which funneled the savings from reduced prison costs into programs designed to combat poverty and addiction - the root causes of crime.

Christopher Hallenbrook, a political science professor with Cal State Dominguez Hills, agrees that Prop 36 will cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars, money he says will be diverted from anti-crime initiatives.

"There's no way you can pass '36' and not put more people in jail. The more money you're spending on incarceration, the less money you're spending on other things," Hallenbrook stated. "That is definitely an accurate assessment for Prop. 36 and it seems to be one that voters decided they were OK with."

Prop. 36 was largely funded by such retail giants as Home Depot, Target and Walmart, hoping that the prospect of higher penalties would deter retail crime.


get more stories like this via email

Loretta Rush, Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court, has released the 2023-24 annual report for the state's courts.

The report shows Indiana's judicial system is taking big steps to tackle the mental health crisis. The Supreme Court recently launched the Office of Behavioral Health and hired Brittany Kelly as its behavioral health specialist, making Indiana the tenth state in the country to embed a mental health professional within its judiciary.

"She's off and running. She's had hundreds of inquiries from around the state. She's meeting with judges," Rush outlined. "She's helping with things like competency evaluations, access to Medicaid, how do I get somebody who's going through dementia through the court system?"

Rush pointed out Kelly will help the courts manage the mental health and substance use issues flooding Indiana's courtrooms daily. The latest report shows more than 1 million cases passed through the courts this past fiscal year, including almost 20,000 involuntary mental health hearings and a sharp rise in protective orders for domestic violence.

Rush highlighted the strain on local courts, noting about 70% of people in jail have behavioral health issues.

"How do we make sure we have diversion programs in place? How do we make sure that the services we're ordering for people to do are the right services?" Rush asked. "We've done a lot at the national level with regard to substance abuse and mental health, realizing programs that are working."

The judiciary is working with state agencies to reform policies and address the impact of mental health issues on the system. Kelly has training in both social work and law, and helps judges connect with treatment resources to get people the support they need and keep them out of jail.


get more stories like this via email

Survivors of crime are speaking out against Proposition 36, which goes before California voters in November.

The ballot measure would increase penalties for some theft and drug crimes - and undo parts of Proposition 47, which took savings from decreased incarceration and put the money into harm-reduction programs.

Tinisch Hollins, executive director of Californians for Safety and Justice, spoke Wednesday at the opening of a new trauma recovery center in Oakland.

"It's pushing the state to move back towards 'tough-on-crime.' We are pushing back on that. You need to prioritize resources to create trauma-recovery centers because this is the way to create safety in our community." Hollins said.

Supporters of Prop. 36 say current laws are too lenient, particularly concerning retail theft. But the state legislative analyst has suggested Prop. 36 will send many more people to jail, increasing criminal-justice costs anywhere from tens of millions to the low hundreds of millions of dollars each year.

Hollins said that would mean less money for programs that actually address poverty and desperation - the root cause of crime.

"Folks who have been touched by incarceration, folks who are experiencing homelessness, folks who are experiencing barriers to employment, they can actually get a full range of services to stabilize," Hollins added. "Think about how impactful this will be if we're able to continue expanding this model."

Advocates of Prop. 36 project that it would mean $850 million less over the next decade for trauma recovery centers, mental health, drug treatment, victim services, re-entry and crime-prevention programs.