U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro Criticizes D.C.'s Juvenile Justice System for Perceived Leniency and Record Sealing

Washington D.C. – U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Judge Jeanine Pirro, has voiced strong criticism regarding the capital's juvenile justice system, citing concerns over the prosecution of underage crimes, judicial discretion in sentencing, and the sealing of juvenile records. Her remarks highlight a growing tension between local D.C. legislative efforts focused on rehabilitation and federal calls for stricter accountability.

According to D.C. law, a juvenile is defined as an individual under 18 years of age. For those aged 15 to 18, D.C. Code § 16–2307(e-2) establishes a rebuttable presumption for transfer to adult court for specific serious offenses. These include murder, first-degree sexual abuse (equivalent to rape), first-degree burglary, robbery while armed, assault with intent to commit such offenses, any crime committed with a firearm, or any violent felony committed by a youth with three or more prior delinquency adjudications. U.S. Attorney Pirro explicitly stated, "If they're older than 17 I can get the case. If they're under 18, I can't get the case unless it's murder, robbery 1, or r**e." She further noted, "Even if they shoot a gun, I can't get it," indicating her view that current laws impede prosecution of certain gun-related offenses unless they meet specific criteria for adult transfer.

Pirro also criticized the D.C. Council's role in judicial sentencing, stating, "The DC Council has given the judges ability to give probations on shootings. Then it's up to them." This points to a perceived leniency within the system, where judges retain significant discretion even for serious violent crimes. While the recently passed Recidivism Reduction, Oversight, and Accountability for DYRS Act (ROAD Act) aims to enhance accountability for the Department of Youth Rehabilitative Services (DYRS), it does not directly restrict judicial discretion in granting probation for such offenses. Some federal lawmakers, like Congressman Byron Donalds, have proposed legislation to remove judicial discretion for sentencing below mandatory minimums, aligning with Pirro's stance.

A significant point of contention for Pirro is the ability to seal juvenile records. "Now they also want to seal records. So even if we get a conviction they want to wipe it out. This all needs to change," she asserted in a recent social media post. D.C. law already allows for the sealing of juvenile arrest records under the Comprehensive Youth Justice Amendment Act of 2016. Furthermore, the Youth Rehabilitation Amendment Act of 2018 permits youth offenders to have their convictions "set aside" after completing their probation or sentence, effectively removing the conviction record, a practice that Pirro evidently finds problematic.

U.S. Attorney Pirro's comments, made as she took office, underscore a broader ideological divide in D.C.'s approach to juvenile crime. While local D.C. legislation often emphasizes rehabilitation and second chances, drawing on research about adolescent brain development, federal officials like Pirro and some members of Congress advocate for a more punitive stance, prioritizing public safety through stricter enforcement and longer-lasting consequences for juvenile offenders. This ongoing debate shapes the future of juvenile justice policy in the nation's capital.