Sponsors (2)
Want to know what is actually in this bill?
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Makes targeted textual edits in Section 103 (definitions): replaces certain cross-references to paragraph numbering to reflect redesignation (changes 'and (15)' to 'and (16)' in paragraph (30) and '(a)(15)' to '(a)(16)' in paragraph (39)).
Substantially revises the State plan requirements in Section 223: modifies advisory group evidence requirement; adds and reorders multiple plan subparagraphs and program categories; establishes specific procedures, timelines, and limits for juveniles taken into custody for violating valid court orders for status offenses (including notification, interviews, assessments, hearings, short maximum detention periods, and a deadline for eliminating use of valid court orders for secure confinement except in limited Interstate Compact circumstances); adds protections and procedural rules for juveniles treated as adults and held in secure facilities; redesignates multiple paragraphs; updates intake and review timing; expands demographic categories; and restricts eligibility of local public and private nonprofit agencies to receive certain funds to exigent circumstances and for no more than 2 consecutive years.
Adjusts an internal cross-reference by replacing a reference to paragraph numbering (changes '(a)(14)' to '(a)(15)') to reflect the redesignation of paragraphs in Section 223.
Modifies the fiscal year span in the authorization of appropriations: replaces the previous authorized fiscal year range with a new range.
Updates the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act to change who and how grants are awarded, strengthen protections for youths held for violating court orders, limit when youths may be housed in adult jails, and add new program categories such as racial disparity work and diversion programs. States must revise their plans to match new definitions and requirements to receive some funds, and the bill updates cross-references and the authorization period for juvenile justice funding. The changes shift more attention and potential funding toward programs that reduce racial disparities and expand diversion from formal court processing, while imposing timing, placement, and protection rules for youth custody. State and local agencies, courts, juvenile detention facilities, community providers, and children and families involved with the juvenile system are the main groups affected.
Amend Section 103(22) of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 by inserting new material (definition insertion).
Amend Section 223 (State plans) to change language about advisory groups so the State must provide evidence it has established or is working toward an advisory group.
In Section 223(a)(9), change wording so funds 'shall be used in accordance with the plan' and allow the phrase 'promising programs, which may include programs for—' (modifies how program uses are described).
Replace 'expand the use of probation officers' with 'improve probation departments' in subparagraph (F). Also change the phrase 'non-violent juvenile offenders (including status offenders)' to 'youth' in a clause in subparagraph (F).
Add new program categories to the list of eligible programs in the State plan: (X) programs to address racial and ethnic disparities; (Y) programs and projects to collect data on socioeconomic status of youth in the juvenile justice system; (Z) programs to help divert youth from the justice system before or after arrest; and (AA) programs supporting initiatives described in paragraphs (11)–(13) and (16).
Children and youth involved with the juvenile justice system are the primary affected group: the bill strengthens protections for youths held for court-order violations and reduces their exposure to adult jails. States and local governments must update juvenile justice plans, data collection, and compliance practices to meet revised requirements before receiving certain federal funds, which creates administrative work but makes them eligible for new or restructured grant programs. Community-based organizations, diversion program providers, and service providers are more likely to be eligible for federal support, which encourages investment in alternatives to detention and racial disparity reduction projects. Juvenile courts, probation departments, and detention facilities will need to adjust operational policies (timing, placement, and safeguards) to comply with placement limits and custody protections. Families and communities may see reduced detention rates and increased access to diversion and supportive services, especially where programs target racial disparities; however, implementation will depend on state/local adoption and available funding.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced July 10, 2025 by Charles Ernest Grassley · Last progress July 10, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate