Bill Sponsors
Bissaillon, LaMountain, Ciccone, McKenney, Kallman, and Famiglietti
Committee
Senate Judiciary
Summary
Select
This legislation amends the laws governing Family Court proceedings, specifically regarding the process of certifying a juvenile to be tried as an adult. It removes a provision that previously mandated that any person sixteen years or older, who had been found delinquent for two prior serious offenses, must automatically be certified as an adult. By striking this language, the bill eliminates the "two strikes" mandatory transfer rule. Instead, the decision to transfer a juvenile to adult court will rely on the court's discretion based on evidence, the nature of the offense, and rehabilitation potential, rather than an automatic trigger.
Sponsor
Analysis
Pros for Progressives
- Restores judicial discretion and individualized justice by eliminating mandatory minimums for transferring youth to adult court, ensuring judges can consider the unique circumstances and rehabilitation potential of each child.
- Aligns with evidence-based practices regarding adolescent brain development by keeping more youth in the juvenile justice system, where the focus is on treatment and rehabilitation rather than the punitive nature of adult prisons.
- Helps dismantle the school-to-prison pipeline by preventing the automatic criminalization of troubled youth, a practice that disproportionately affects minority communities and low-income families.
Cons for Progressives
- The bill preserves the ability of the Attorney General to move for certification, meaning youth can still be subjected to the adult criminal justice system based on prosecutorial discretion rather than a complete ban on trying children as adults.
- Does not address the underlying systemic issues or lack of resources that lead juveniles to commit repeat offenses, potentially leaving them in a Family Court system that may still lack adequate support structures.
- Fails to implement retroactive relief for individuals who were previously certified as adults under the mandatory provision that is now being repealed.
Pros for Conservatives
- Restores the authority of the judiciary to make determinations based on evidence rather than legislative mandates, upholding the separation of powers and judicial independence.
- Ensures that the specific facts of a case are weighed through a proper hearing process, strengthening due process protections against arbitrary government action.
- Allows for a more efficient allocation of correctional resources by ensuring that only those deemed truly irredeemable by a judge, rather than by a blanket statute, are sent to adult facilities.
Cons for Conservatives
- Removes a critical tool for ensuring that repeat violent juvenile offenders face strict adult consequences, essentially being "soft on crime" for dangerous teenagers who have already proven to be habitual offenders.
- Undermines public safety by potentially allowing older teenagers with a history of serious delinquency to remain in the juvenile system, where detention periods are often shorter and less secure than adult prison.
- Eliminates a clear deterrent against repeat offenses, sending a message that the legal system will continue to show leniency even to those who have disregarded the law multiple times.
Constitutional Concerns
None Likely
Impact Overview
Groups Affected
- Juvenile offenders
- Family Court judges
- Attorney General's office
- Victims of crime
- Families of juvenile offenders
Towns Affected
All
Cost to Taxpayers
Amount unknown
Revenue Generated
None
BillBuddy Impact Ratings
Importance
Measures population affected and overall level of impact.
Freedom Impact
Level of individual freedom impacted by the bill.
Public Services
How much the bill is likely to impact one or more public services.
Regulatory
Estimated regulatory burden imposed on the subject(s) of the bill.
Clarity of Bill Language
How clear the language of the bill is. Higher ambiguity equals a lower score.
Enforcement Provisions
Measures enforcement provisions and penalties for non-compliance (if applicable).
Environmental Impact
Impact the bill will have on the environment, positive or negative.
Privacy Impact
Impact the bill is likely to have on the privacy of individuals.
Bill Status
Current Status
Held
Comm Passed
Floor Passed
Law
History
• 01/16/2026 Introduced, referred to Senate Judiciary
Bill Text
SECTION 1. Section 14-1-7.2 of the General Laws in Chapter 14-1 entitled "Proceedings in Family Court" is hereby amended to read as follows:
14-1-7.2. Certification — Proof.
(a) Upon a motion by the attorney general pursuant to § 14-1-7, the court shall conduct a hearing at which it shall be the duty of the attorney general to produce evidence to enable the court to determine:
(1) Probable cause exists to believe that the offense charged has been committed and that the child charged has committed it;
(2) The child’s past history of offenses, history of treatment, or the heinous or premeditated nature of the offense is such that the court finds that the interests of society or the protection of the public necessitate the certification; and
(3) The jurisdiction of the court but for the exercise of certification is in all likelihood an insufficient period of time in which to accomplish a rehabilitation of the child.
(b) If the court finds that subdivisions (a)(1) — (a)(3) of this section have been proven by a preponderance of evidence, it shall certify the child pursuant to § 14-1-7.3.
(c)Any person sixteen (16) years of age or older who has been found delinquent for having committed two (2) offenses after the age of sixteen (16), which would render that person subject to an indictment if he or she were an adult, shall be certified pursuant to this section. Any findings for offenses which have occurred prior to April 11, 1990, shall be considered in making a determination of eligibility for certification. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a waiver of jurisdiction of any child pursuant to § 14-1-7.1.
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon passage.
14-1-7.2. Certification — Proof.
(a) Upon a motion by the attorney general pursuant to § 14-1-7, the court shall conduct a hearing at which it shall be the duty of the attorney general to produce evidence to enable the court to determine:
(1) Probable cause exists to believe that the offense charged has been committed and that the child charged has committed it;
(2) The child’s past history of offenses, history of treatment, or the heinous or premeditated nature of the offense is such that the court finds that the interests of society or the protection of the public necessitate the certification; and
(3) The jurisdiction of the court but for the exercise of certification is in all likelihood an insufficient period of time in which to accomplish a rehabilitation of the child.
(b) If the court finds that subdivisions (a)(1) — (a)(3) of this section have been proven by a preponderance of evidence, it shall certify the child pursuant to § 14-1-7.3.
(c)
SECTION 2. This act shall take effect upon passage.