Abstract

This thesis explores the shifting nature of the Juvenile Justice System from its foundational principles and values to its contemporary structure. Specifically, this paper investigates how and why the contemporary Juvenile Justice System is shaped by a rhetorical discourse created by public opinion, state and federal legislation, and Supreme Court case law. Moreover, this paper examines how the public, legislatures, and Supreme Court justices define juvenile jurisdiction, and how they decide on the appropriate punishment for juvenile offenders