Convinced a city curfew impinged on his rights, 16-year-old Jacob Remes joined seven other teenagers in a lawsuit last November to regain their late-night freedom.
At school Tuesday, a fellow student and plaintiff told Remes they had won it back.Turning away from the majority of other court decisions on curfews, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan declared Washington's curfew law unconstitutional, ruling it violated the rights of minors and parents.
"I'm, of course, very excited about it," Remes said of the decision, which came in a case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union. "It validates my feeling that teenagers are citizens just like adults."
Sullivan's decision rejected the city's argument that children were protected by the law, which took effect Sept. 20, 1995. It set curfews of 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. on weekdays and midnight to 6 a.m. on weekends for children under 17.
A Justice Department survey several months ago found that 73 percent of the 200 largest U.S. cities have imposed curfews to combat rising youth crime rates.
The Supreme Court in May rejected a challenge to a Dallas curfew. The justices, without comment, left intact a lower court ruling that said the curfew was properly aimed at "protecting juveniles from crimes on the streets." The high court action did not establish a national precedent on curfews.
In May, President Clinton praised a youth curfew in New Orleans, where city officials said it helped reduce crime. Clinton urged communities nationally to consider curfews to combat juvenile delinquency. And Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole has also spoken in support of them.
Disappointed by the ruling, Mayor Marion Barry described the curfew as an important tool in protecting minors from crime.
"I regret that the U.S. District Court did not agree and that the court has given a thumbs-down to a well-thought-out effort to combat crime in the district," Barry said in a statement, adding that the city corporate counsel will study the decision for a possible appeal.
The city argued its curfew didn't violate equal protection guarantees because it was imposed to protect children from becoming victims or perpetrators of crime.
Sullivan's ruling said the city failed to show how the curfew would do that.