Vermont’s ‘Raise the Age’ Law Faces Further Delay
In a recent development at the Vermont State House, Rep. Theresa Wood, D-Waterbury, and Rep. Martin Lalonde, D-South Burlington, chairs of the House Human Services and House Judiciary committees respectively, gathered with other legislators for a briefing on the juvenile justice system. During this joint committee meeting in Montpelier on Wednesday, Jan. 15, discussions surrounding the Raise the Age law took center stage. The pivotal committee, led by Rep. LaLonde, made a significant decision to postpone the next phase of Vermont’s Raise the Age law, marking a shift from the Democrats’ previous momentum to push forward with the initiative.
A Compromise Bill Emerges
What was once a clear trajectory towards implementing the juvenile justice initiative has now become a nuanced negotiation between political stakeholders. Governor Phil Scott, along with top public safety officials, has voiced concerns about the legislation, urging lawmakers to reconsider the proposed changes. Rep. LaLonde characterized the latest bill, H.2, as a “compromise bill” during discussions with his colleagues prior to the vote. The House Judiciary Committee’s endorsement of H.2 in a 7-2-2 vote not only delayed the Raise the Age law but also introduced a provision to raise the age for juvenile offenses from 10 to 12 years old.
The Road Ahead
As the House prepares to delve into the details of H.2 after the upcoming Town Meeting Day break, the fate of the Raise the Age law hangs in the balance. Originally passed in 2018, this law grants 18-year-olds facing misdemeanors and lower-level felonies the opportunity to have their cases heard in family court, ensuring privacy and fostering rehabilitative outcomes over punitive measures. However, with the impending expansion to include 19-year-olds in April, legislators are poised to extend the delay for an additional two years, a decision that has been recurrent since 2022.
Governor’s Concerns and Advocates’ Perspectives
Governor Scott and his administration have been vocal critics of the Raise the Age program, citing concerns about accountability and the program’s pace of implementation. The administration’s argument against the expansion highlights the need for more effective resource allocation within the Department for Children and Family (DCF). On the other hand, advocates of Raise the Age emphasize the protective measures afforded to young individuals, shielding them from enduring the lifelong consequences of a criminal record. They draw attention to scientific research indicating ongoing brain development in young adults, underscoring the importance of the law’s provisions.
Challenges and Considerations
As discussions continue within the House Judiciary Committee, stakeholders are grappling with the readiness of the state to accommodate the forthcoming changes. While some express reservations about the current environment’s preparedness for the law’s expansion, others, like Marshall Pahl, Vermont’s top juvenile public defender, underscore the positive impact of Raise the Age on 18-year-olds. However, the delay in readiness for the law’s extension to 19-year-olds has raised questions about its feasibility and resource implications. Amy Davenport, a retired judge advocating for equitable youth justice, has challenged assumptions about the potential burden on DCF, presenting a nuanced perspective on the charges involving 19-year-olds in Vermont.
In conclusion, the deliberations surrounding Vermont’s ‘Raise the Age’ law underscore the complexities of juvenile justice reform and the intricate balance between policy implementation and resource allocation. As legislators navigate the path forward, the voices of stakeholders and experts will continue to shape the trajectory of this critical legislation.
