The Court ruled that, under the Constitution, children in delinquency cases are entitled to due process rights. The Gault decision was a clear departure from the former view of the juvenile court as a benevolent system where judges had unlimited discretion to tend to children's needs. The rights of children and parents have continued to be expanded and redefined, both by judges' decisions and by new laws. To make decisions as informed as possible, many judges welcome information from an unusually wide range of disciplines. Juvenile court judges are often quick to recognize that their decisions, which may profoundly affect a child's life, are only as good as the input they receive.
Some States have special juvenile courts that are separate from adult courts.
Other States, however, have juvenile courts that are less distinct from the rest of their court systems, and child protection cases are heard in juvenile sessions of regular courts that handle all types of cases. Whether a child protection case is brought in a separate juvenile court or incorporated into the broader court system may affect some practical aspects of the case. Since child maltreatment cases brought in regular courts must share court time with many other types of cases, delays are more likely in actually getting the case into court and formally resolved. In addition, because general jurisdiction trial court judges must deal with a wide selection of cases, these judges are less familiar with child welfare issues. Court personnel and services are often less focused on these issues as well, although some general jurisdiction courts have specially trained personnel for use in child protection cases.