This bill lowers the minimum age for a minor to be tried as an adult for certain criminal offenses in the District of Columbia from sixteen to fourteen years old.
Brandon Gill
Representative
TX-26
This bill amends District of Columbia law to lower the minimum age at which a minor can be tried as an adult for certain criminal offenses from sixteen to fourteen years old. It modifies the jurisdiction of the Family Court, allowing 14- and 15-year-olds to potentially face adult criminal proceedings for specified crimes. These changes only apply to offenses committed on or after the law's effective date.
| Party | Total Votes | Yes | No | Did Not Vote |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Democrat | 213 | 8 | 202 | 3 |
Republican | 219 | 217 | 1 | 1 |
This legislation proposes a significant shift in how the District of Columbia handles serious crimes committed by minors. Currently, a young person must be at least 16 years old to be excluded from the protections of Family Court and tried as an adult in the criminal court system. This bill changes that minimum age from 16 down to 14 years old, affecting both the initial exclusion from Family Court jurisdiction and the subsequent process for transferring a minor to a regular criminal proceeding. Essentially, it opens the door for 14- and 15-year-olds accused of certain serious offenses to face adult penalties and consequences.
When a minor is tried as an adult, they lose the specialized resources, confidentiality, and rehabilitation focus inherent in the juvenile justice system. Instead, they face the full weight of the adult criminal justice system, including potential sentencing in adult facilities and the lifelong burden of an adult criminal record. This bill, by amending D.C. Code Sections 16-2301 and 16-2307, makes this harsh reality accessible to a younger demographic. For example, a 15-year-old accused of a crime defined as one of the ‘certain criminal offenses’ would now be eligible for adult prosecution, where previously they would have remained under the jurisdiction of the Family Court due to their age.
For most people, the immediate impact is on the notion of public safety and accountability. The stated purpose of such legislation is often to ensure that those who commit severe crimes, regardless of age, face serious consequences. However, the practical challenge lies in the developmental science: a 14-year-old’s brain is fundamentally different from an adult’s, impacting their decision-making and impulse control. Moving these young people into the adult system exposes them to environments that are often less focused on rehabilitation and more on punishment, which can affect their entire trajectory. This change also raises concerns about potential disproportionate impact, as studies consistently show that youth of color are already overrepresented in the adult criminal justice system.
Consider the long-term consequences: an adult criminal record makes it significantly harder to get accepted into college, secure stable employment, or even find safe housing. For a 14- or 15-year-old, receiving an adult conviction can essentially derail their life before it even starts. The juvenile justice system is designed, imperfectly, to prioritize the child’s future, whereas the adult system prioritizes retribution and public safety through incarceration. By lowering the age threshold, the bill shifts the focus from child welfare to adult-level accountability for this younger group, a move that juvenile justice experts often warn against due to high rates of recidivism associated with placing minors in adult facilities.