Juvenile curfews: are they an effective and constitutional means of combating juvenile violence?

Curfew ordinances have become a popular way to attempt to combat juvenile crime and victimization. Although the Supreme Court has yet to hear a curfew case, several constitutional challenges have been brought in lower federal courts. The cases are replete with psychological assumptions for which there is limited empirical evidence. In applying the "strict scrutiny" standard, several courts have also questioned whether juvenile curfews are narrowly tailored to further the State's interest in reducing juvenile crime and victimization. While public opinion and reports from several police jurisdictions support the utility of juvenile curfews, recent empirical studies indicate that curfews are not effective at reducing juvenile offending or victimization. This paper argues that the emerging evidence does not support the use of juvenile curfews and urges policy makers and the courts to examine the efficacy of curfew legislation. Directions for future research that could be helpful to the courts in applying the Bellotti factors to curfew cases are also suggested.