California Supreme Court upholds law barring prosecutors from charging teens younger than 16 as adults

The California Supreme Court rejected arguments by prosecutors that SB 1391 was an unconstitutional amendment to Prop 57.

SAN FRANCISCO — In a landmark ruling, the California Supreme Court has found that SB 1391 — the state law barring children younger than 16 from being charged as adults — is in line with the state’s constitution, rejecting arguments made by some prosecutors that it was an unlawful amendment to Proposition 57.

The ruling is a victory for justice reform proponents, who championed the 2019 law on the basis that it is unfair to charge teens as adults when their brains aren’t fully developed. The law applies to all offenses, even serious crimes like homicide charges.

The California Supreme Court’s decision was unanimous, 7-0, according to court records. The decision centered on a case in Ventura County where a 15-year-old was charged with two counts of murder.

“The amendment is fully consistent with and furthers Proposition 57’s fundamental purposes of promoting rehabilitation of youthful offenders and reducing the prison population,” Associate Justice Joshua Groban wrote in the decision. “We therefore uphold Senate Bill 1391 as a permissible amendment to Proposition 57.”

Proposition 57, passed by voters in 2016, changed rules for juvenile justice, revised sentencing rules, and changed how good behavior credits are calculated for jail and prison sentences. While Prop. 57’s language allowed for future legislative amendments to the part of the law related to the judge’s transfer hearing provision, attorneys arguing the case Tuesday disagreed on whether or not the removal of all transfers to adult court for the affected age group remained “consistent with and further the intent of this act,” as the proposition’s language mandates.

The differences between adult and juvenile court are vast; people convicted as adults are eligible for life sentences, while people convicted as juveniles are rarely held past their 25th birthday, even for murders. The adult court system is more punitive by nature, whereas juvenile court systems place a greater emphasis on rehabilitation.

“The opinion means the state will not return to a practice that is harmful to youth and communities. Now the state will focus on rehabilitating young people,” Elizabeth Calvin, a  Senior Advocate for Human Rights Watch said in a written statement reacting to the ruling. “Research shows that rehabilitation works: Youth who are sent to the adult system miss out on the treatment, education, and services offered in the juvenile system. Youth kept in the juvenile system are less likely to commit new crimes.”

Check back for updates.

Jessica York with the Santa Cruz Sentinel contributed reporting.