In re Gault

***In re Gault***, , was a landmark case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1967.  The Court ruled that  (children and teenagers) have the same rights as adults when they are  of a crime.  For example, they have due process rights, like the right to have a lawyer, when they are being questioned by the police, and when they are on trial.

The Court's ruling in this case was so important for children's rights that Justice Earl Warren said it would become "the Magna Carta for juveniles."

## History
In the four years before the Supreme Court decided *In re: Gault*, the Court also decided some other very important cases about due process rights  the rights people have when they are accused of a crime.  However, these rulings did not apply to children who were being tried in juvenile courts. The case was argued by Norman Dorsen in favor of the juveniles.

### Rights for adults
#### Constitutional rights
The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution says that "In all criminal , the accused shall enjoy the right to ... the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."  ("Counsel" is a legal word for "lawyer.")

Also, the Fourteenth Amendment says that no state can take away any person's "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person ... the equal protection of the laws."

#### Supreme Court cases
Based on these two amendments, the Supreme Court decided these landmark cases:

* *Gideon v. Wainwright*, : The Court ruled that having a lawyer is necessary for a fair trial.  It ruled that any defendant charged with any crime had the right to a lawyer.  If the defendant cannot pay for a lawyer, the state must assign them a free lawyer.
* *Miranda v. Arizona*, : When a person is being asked whether they committed a crime, they do not have to answer.  They cannot get in trouble for not answering.  This is called the right against "self-incrimination" (the right not to say anything that proves you committed a crime).  Before being questioned, a suspect must be told that they do not have to answer any questions.

These decisions, however, only applied to adult courts.  While the Constitution never says that its rights are only for adults, American courts had never given juveniles the same due process rights as adults.

### Juvenile courts
In the United States' court system, there are separate courts for children who are accused of committing crimes or having behavior problems.  These are called "juvenile courts."  Without being charged with a crime, Gault had been put in a juvenile jail.

Gault has always said that his friend Ronald Lewis made the call to Cook from the Gault family's trailer.  In 2007, Gault said that once he heard what Lewis said, he kicked Lewis out.

### Juvenile court hearings
#### First hearing
The next morning, Gault had his first court hearing, in front of Judge McGhee.  Judge McGhee usually worked in the Gila County Superior Court (an adult court), but was working in the juvenile court that day.

At the end of the hearing, Judge McGhee said he would think about what to do, and sent Gault back to jail.  Gault was kept in jail for a few more days, then was sent home.  Nobody ever explained why he was kept in jail or why he was let go.

#### Second hearing
At the second hearing, McGhee ruled that Gault was "a delinquent child."  This meant Gault had broken a state law.  McGhee ordered Gault to be sent to the State Industrial School until he turned 21, unless the court decided to let him out before then.  This punishment was based on a charge of "Lewd Phone Calls."  If Gault had been convicted of the same crime as an adult, the Arizona laws would have allowed a maximum punishment of two months in prison and a fine of $5 to $50.  Judge McGhee had said "she didn't have to be ."  Judge McGhee had never told Gault's parents that they could bring a lawyer to the hearings or call witnesses to defend Gerald.

Also, nobody wrote a  (a record of exactly what was said) during either hearing.  Because of this, there was no proof of what Gault or Judge McGhee said during these hearings.   Later, Judge McGhee said Gault admitted to saying something "" to Mrs. Cook.
* Gerald used lewd language while another person could hear (this was a misdemeanor under the Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-377)

The court dismissed the habeas corpus petition.  It ruled that Judge McGhee had enough evidence and legal reasons to send Gault to jail.

### Appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court
Next, Amelia Lewis and the Gaults appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court (99 Ariz. 181 (1965)). They had two main arguments.  They argued that Gerald's conviction was not legal because he was not given the due process rights in the Constitution.  They also argued that the state's set of juvenile laws, the Arizona Juvenile Code, was unconstitutional because it did not include these due process rights.
* The specific question: Were Gerald Gault's due process rights violated when he was convicted and sent to juvenile prison?  If they were, what should happen to him?
* The general question: Was the Arizona Juvenile Code unconstitutional because it did not give juveniles the due process rights in the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution?
* The biggest question: Did juveniles even *have* the same due process rights as adults?  Did the Fourteenth Amendment even apply to juvenile court processes?

### Decision
On May 15, 1967, the Supreme Court voted 81 in favor of the Gaults.  They ruled that Gerald's due process rights *were* violated.

Justice Abe Fortas wrote the Court's majority opinion.  He wrote:

Justice Fortas pointed out that if Gerald were over 18, and were tried in adult court, he would have had many different rights, including the ones in this table.  He had spent three years in the Industrial School: two years and ten months longer than he could have possibly spent in prison if he was convicted as an adult.

The Court also ruled Arizona's Juvenile Code unconstitutional.  They ruled that Juvenile Codes had to include due process rights.

## Notes
## References
## Other websites
* Download a video about The *Gault* case  or a video of Gerald Gault talking about his case  (from The National Juvenile Defender Center's *Gault* page )