Court Control over Treatment of Juvenile Offenders

The thesis of this paper can be stated simply: to the extent that courts permit procedural (or substantive)\u27 treatment of juveniles which varies from and falls below the constitutional protections which adults may command, and that variance is predicated upon the power of the State to substitute rehabilitation for punishment in dealing with the young, then, and to the same extent, the courts have the duty of seeing to it that the treatment afforded is in fact rehabilitative and not punitive in nature and effect. Otherwise, the courts must face the criticism that: It is not only illogical but blatantly inconsistent with the fair treatment of the child to argue, on the one hand, that the safeguards of criminal procedure are unnecessary in non criminal cases and then, on the other hand, to apply criminal sanctions in such cases

The Federal Constitution and the Choice of Law

To what extent may the Constitution of the United States serve as final referent for the problem: Which state law shall govern cases in which the facts in controversy concern more than one state? This question has already evoked analyses primarily as a question concerning the conflict of laws ; and in those analyses will be found able and extensive delineation of the general aspect of its problems which will not be repeated here. A simple statement will serve to distinguish the viewpoint adopted in the present discussion. Constitutional law arises solely from express dictates of a written document. It follows that any such question as, Has the Conflict of Laws become a branch of Constitutional Law? poses a false problem if taken literally. In the case stated at the opening of this discussion, the Supreme Court could not say, We find that the conflict of laws rule makes New York\u27s statute the properly governing law, and therefore Georgia\u27s failure to apply it violates the full faith and credit clause. \u27 The Constitution must furnish the tests for ascertaining the properly applicable law as well as the requirement that it be applied when ascertained. Thus the question may correctly be put: to what extent do the constitutional rules governing choice of law supersede or overlap the conflict of laws rules on the same subject, and what are they

Book Reviews

THE TRIAL OF JACK RUBY. By John Kaplan and Jon Waltz. BASIC PROTECTION FOR THE TRAFFIC VICTIM. (A Blueprint for Reforming Automobile Insurance.) By Robert E. Keeton and Jeffrey O\u27Connell