Restorative justice is on the minds of educators in California who seek to reduce student suspensions and expulsions. The goal is to keep youths in the classroom whenever it is possible to do so—the days of removing kids from class for disruption and defiance seem to be largely a thing of the past.

Many large school districts up and down the state have histories of disproportionately suspending and expelling minorities and youths with learning disabilities. The data reveals that such demographics are removed from class at exponentially higher rates than their white counterparts.

Several legislative reforms have led educators to adopt new approaches to dealing with students who act up or get in trouble. Programs were established in the Oakland, Los Angeles, and San Diego Unified School Districts that utilize alternatives to traditional methods of school discipline.

In 2006, the Oakland Unified School District (OUSD) became the first to implement a restorative justice program, EdSource reports. Restorative justice coordinators and facilitators work with teachers and students to resolve conflicts in a manner that does not involve removing children from school. The program has served as a model for other school districts across the country and other countries.

Naturally, programs like the one in Oakland and others cost a significant amount of money to facilitate. Recent budget cuts may undermine the effectiveness of Oakland’s restorative justice program or jeopardize it altogether.

Funding Restorative Justice

“In recent years, OUSD has made significant strides in changing the prevailing paradigm of punishment and exclusion in response to real or perceived student misconduct,” states a report from the Executive Office of the President – December 2016. “These gains reflect deep structural changes at both the district and school site level resulting from more positive, restorative and trauma-informed responses to student behavior.”

The OUSD program’s future was put in jeopardy due to the school district’s proposed budget cuts announced earlier this year. Fortunately, the program’s achievements have not gone unnoticed, and the city and private backers have stepped lend support. State data shows that suspensions fell in Oakland by 48 percent between the 2011-12 and 2017-18 school years.

The city of Oakland issued a one-time $690,000 grant to fund the program for the 2019-20 school year, according to the article. Various foundations and philanthropists have also contributed to the effort.

There are no guarantees the program will be funded in the future, says David Yusem, Oakland Unified’s restorative justice coordinator. He adds that “We need to make adjustments based on the current fiscal reality.” Yusem points out that the program may need to be altered to compensate for funding cuts.

“We are just beginning to have those meetings,” Yusem said. “We’re taking stock and sort of going from there in terms of where are our priorities and how we can hit them while having less money.”

It’s likely that Los Angeles and San Diego Unified School Districts will face similar challenges in the coming years.

California School Discipline Attorney

If your child is facing difficulties at school and is at risk of expulsion, then please contact the Law Office of Katie Walsh. Juvenile Defense attorney Walsh can represent your child in many ways and advocate for the needs of your family.

Last month, we covered Senate Bill 607, as it relates to juvenile justice in California. The bill – authored by Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley – would have expanded a bill signed into law in 2014 banning the suspension of students in grades K-3 for acts of “disruption and defiance.” Sen. Skinner’s proposal had the expressed aim of changing the law to include students through the 8th grade.

Earlier this month, California Governor Jerry Brown vetoed SB 607, EdSource reports. While it was unclear if Brown would get on onboard, considering he was opposed to legislation in 2012 that would have banned such suspensions for grades K-12, he showed this month that he would not be swayed. Gov. Brown states that local control is his main reason for rejecting the bill, just as it was in 2012.

Senator Skinner sensed that Brown would come out against her measure much like the Association of California School Administrators and the California School Boards Association. So, she wrote SB-607 to include K-8 rather than K-12, to get the support of the organizations above, hoping it would be enough for Brown as well.

“Teachers and principals are on the front lines of educating our children and are in the best position to make decisions about order and discipline in the classrooms,” said Brown, in the veto message.

Civil Rights Advocates Are Not Surprised

Kids – as everyone knows – can be unruly; punitive measures are one way to teach young people the difference between right and wrong. However, there is a significant body of evidence suggesting that “disruption and defiance” suspensions affect students of color and those with disabilities, disproportionately.

A report from UCLA’s Center for Civil Rights Remedies shows that African-American middle-schoolers lost 71 days per 100 students, almost four times the number of days of class missed by their white classmates. When students miss class frequently, they are far more likely to get in other – more severe – types of trouble. Suspension and expulsion are often the catalysts of the school-to-prison pipeline. The California Department of Education CALPADS Data, 2016-17, shows that black and brown boys were 53.3% of disruption/defiance suspensions in the 2016-17 school year, despite making up only 30.7% of CA students.

Bills like SB-607 and its predecessor are meant to force the hand of educators to utilize disciplinary measures that did not take students out of class for minor infractions, before they resort to harsher courses of action. Despite being at odds with Gov. Brown’s decision, youth and civil rights advocates are not surprised, according to the article. Moreover, they are, in a word, disappointed!

“[Brown] has rejected an opportunity to transform school climate and address a racial injustice in our schools statewide,” said Angelica Salazar, director of education equity for Children’s Defense Fund, California. Senator Skinner has not committed to introducing a new bill next year.

Juvenile Defense in California

Please contact The Law Offices of Katie Walsh if you require the assistance of an Orange County school expulsion lawyer. Attorney Walsh has overseen thousands of juvenile cases in California. Please contact us to schedule a free consultation and learn more about how Katie Walsh can advocate for your family.

Young people are not the best at thinking things through thoroughly before they act, and as a result, they sometimes learn valuable lessons. Even when minors understand the difference between “right” and “wrong,” they can still make unfortunate errors in judgment that can cost them significantly. While some offenses committed by minors are severe and should carry a commensurate punishment, most infractions are benign. However, getting caught up in the juvenile justice system for a minor offense often does more harm than good.

More than a decade ago, the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff’s Station started a diversion program, called “Teen Court.” Minors who commit minor offenses and meet specific criteria are eligible for Teen Court, excluding them from incarceration, formal probation, and a conviction on their record if they complete the requirements within a six-month period. The program can make all the difference for teenagers, potentially keeping them from becoming trapped in the criminal justice system.

L.A. County Teen Court

Teen Court is unique in several ways, notably in the fact that Juveniles who commit minor offenses plead guilty to a jury of their peers, meaning other teenagers in school. After which, teens in the diversion program must avoid getting into trouble during a six-month probationary period, according to KHTS. Juveniles taking part in the program have to do community service, write letters of apology and pay restitution to the victim or victims. Teen Court is only available to first-time offenders.

“We deal with juveniles that have committed misdemeanors and even felonies,” said Dan Finn, a detective with the Santa Clarita Valley Sheriff’s Station. “The only limits are: we don’t take serious felony charges like gang-related crime, rape, murder (or) robbery.”

The goal of programs, like Teen Court, is to avoid recidivism. Data indicates that around half of teens who don’t take part in diversion programs end up going on to commit more crimes. Detective Finn points out that less than 15 percent of the juveniles who go through the Teen Court commit another offense. Owing to the success in Santa Clarita, Los Angeles County is following suit; a little over a year ago, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors approved a plan that would make diversion the focus of the county’s juvenile justice system. The Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, reports that there are 38 Teen Courts in operation at high schools throughout Los Angeles County and over 70 judicial officers preside over the program.

“We catch these kids early, and it’s making a difference,” Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge David S. Wesley, tells California Courts Newsroom. “We are incarcerating fewer kids, and saving millions of dollars keeping them out of the juvenile justice system.”

Juvenile Offense Attorney

At the Law Offices of Katie Walsh, we specialize in juvenile law. If your son or daughter is facing criminal charges, Attorney Walsh can assist you and your family in a number of ways. Please contact our office for a free consultation.

Adolescents, like adults, are disciplined for certain offenses with the hope that said offender will not do it again. It starts at a young age, a child does something wrong—a parent determines the appropriate punishment to mete out. Life is about standards and rules, if one falls short or breaks a rule, punishment follows suit. The hope, it seems, as that by the time adulthood rolls around, an individual will be an upstanding citizen.

Unfortunately, sometimes a punishment does not match the caliber of the offense—especially in American schools. Across the country, what is known as “zero tolerance” policies are in place at practically every public school. Zero tolerance policies were specifically directed towards drugs or weapons. Students found to have either are subject to either suspension or expulsion. While that type of policy would seem to make sense, such policies may actually do more harm than good.

A new book is coming out soon that explores the nature of zero tolerance, with the hope of starting a conversation that could put an end to draconian rules in public schools. Professor Derek W. Black’s “Ending Zero Tolerance: The Crisis of Absolute School Discipline,” highlights the flaws of zero tolerance punishments on school-aged children, according to the Juvenile Justice Information Exchange. Black teaches law at the University of Southern California. He writes:

“One of the most obvious flaws or irrationalities of zero tolerance and harsh discipline is that they lump so many dissimilar students in to the same groups. The first grader whose mother puts a cough drop in his backpack without him knowing is treated the same as the seventh grader who knows that cough drops are prohibited but brings them anyway because his throat hurts and he does not want to miss school. And the seventh-grade cough-drop smuggler is treated the same as the student who brings Advil to school and sells it. And the Advil-distributing student is treated the same as the student who sells steroids or marijuana to his classmates. They are all drug offenders according to their schools and subject to long-term suspension.”

The book covers a number of different areas, sourcing individual narratives, case law—and could prove to be an invaluable tool for both teachers and counselors. Hopefully, it will lead to more understanding and compassion when it comes to discipline in American schools.

“Harsh discipline practices,” writes Black, “are contrary to many of our many basic values, both social and legal.”

Katie Walsh is an attorney in Orange County, California. Attorney Walsh concentrates her law practice on juvenile defense, criminal defense, and victim’s rights.

Contact the Law Offices of Katie Walsh online or at (714) 351-0178.