By Andrea Stevens
AFRO Staff Writer
astevens@afro.com
In a major policy shift, the Maryland Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) has unveiled new guidelines regarding the use of electronic ankle monitoring for youth that include expanded use of detention for those who reoffend while under supervision.
“We want to make sure we’re making decisions based on objectivity and not subjectivity,” said Acting Secretary Betsy Fox Tolentino. “When monitoring isn’t working, we’ll take different action, but that action will include meaningful connection, support and accountability, so we’re setting young people up for success, not just punishment.”
The policy changes aim to strengthen public safety through increased data use and equity-based decision-making. Tolentino emphasized that DJS will use detention in some cases, but only as part of a broader system of interventions.
“Yes, we will use detention if a young person is brought to our attention for reoffending while on the monitor,” Tolentino said. “But we don’t stop there. We want to make sure we’re also employing strategies that are targeted at ensuring our young people are getting what they need.”
Some critics are questioning the policy’s efficacy, especially after Baltimore police announced in late July that a 13-year-old was arrested in connection with a series of armed carjackings and robberies, having 18 prior felony offenses and while wearing an ankle monitor.
“Something has to be done to protect the public and protect this young person,” former Baltimore City Police Deputy Commissioner Jason Johnson was quoted as saying. He added, “ “The state maintains juvenile detention facilities for a reason. And this is a poster child literally for the type of person that needs to be detained.”
Conversely, civil rights advocates are sounding the alarm, warning that the new rules could lead to increased incarceration of youth who have not yet been convicted.
Matt Parsons, a community lawyer with the Baltimore Action Legal Team, criticized the policy as reinforcing systems built on racial injustice.
“These policies and the structures they reinforce were built on injustice,” said Parsons. “The onus should be on the system, on DJS, to prove these policies don’t disproportionately harm Black and Brown youth—although that would be difficult because that’s exactly what they were designed to do.”
Parsons also raised concerns about the presumption of innocence being eroded.
“The directive mandates youth re-arrested while wearing a monitor should be held in detention until their court appearance, meaning more youth will be incarcerated despite the presumption of innocence,” he said.
Iman Freeman, executive director at the Baltimore Action Legal Team, questioned the state’s true goals in expanding surveillance and punishment.
“If the objective is that we want our youth to thrive, then evidence shows this doesn’t lend itself to that,” said Freeman. “This is not aligned with helping children. It’s about marginalization, not support.”
She added that the new policies follow a historical pattern of criminalizing Black youth.
“Adultification of Black youth is a real thing—it distances us from our babies,” Freeman said. “We have to ask: Do we want them in a cage, or do we want them thriving? I want my child to be able to be a child.”
As implementation begins, DJS maintains that it will continue to use data tools such as the Detention Risk Assessment Instrument to guide its decisions. However, advocates say they will keep pushing for policies that center youth development over punishment.