The juvenile justice system has been around for many years, and since its inception it has achieved mixed results. On one hand, it provides a more lenient form of legal punishment for youth offenders and serves to help them avoid the damaging effects of serving time in the adult prison system. On the other hand, some argue that such leniency may allow criminals to get away with their offenses due to lack of accountability. The debate over whether or not to abolish the juvenile justice system is an ongoing one with valid arguments on both sides.

Supporters of abolishing the juvenile justice system argue that juveniles are too young and impressionable to be held accountable for their actions in a judicial setting. They also point out that due to systemic racism there is disproportionate imprisonment of minority youth, leading to lifelong criminal stigma regardless if they were actually guilty or innocent. Additionally, supporters claim that focus should instead be placed on creating socially responsible behavior among youth through education and rehabilitation programs rather than punitive measures which could lead to further alienation from society at large. Furthermore, research has shown that incarceration does not necessarily reduce crime rates but can actually cause recidivism rates to increase when children are released into communities without adequate support systems in place post-incarceration; thus prevention would be a more effective approach than punishment when dealing with youth offenders.