Home > JOURNALS > IJLSE > Vol. 12 (2024) > Iss. 1 (2024)
Abstract
A recent Fourth Circuit decision created a circuit split regarding the standard applied to constitutional violations in secure holding facilities. The more “liberal” professional judgment standard—as promulgated by Youngberg v. Romeo and applied to unaccompanied immigrant minors in Doe 4 ex rel. Lopez—is necessary but insufficient for the protection of unaccompanied children. This Note first examines the origins of the professional judgment standard in the Youngberg case. Then, cases are surveyed showing that the Supreme Court has recognized children as a vulnerable population, and current regulations, legislation, and court opinions recognize the vulnerabilities of unaccompanied children. With these ideas in the foreground, this Note shows that the standard, as applied to adults and to other children, is not sufficient protection. Based on these insufficiencies, this Note then assesses the system experienced by the petitioner. After an evaluation of the purpose of that system, it is clear there are not adequate structures in place to realize that purpose. The Youngberg standard enables those inadequacies; therefore, a more robust standard is needed for the adequate protection of unaccompanied minors like Doe 4. Future research should be done to develop new standards to apply in these cases and ensure vulnerable populations are protected by the systems designed to care for them.
Recommended Citation
12 Ind. J. L. & Soc. Equal. 1