MINNEAPOLIMEDIA NEWS | Minnesota Ends Criminal Prosecution for Children Under 13, Launching Major Juvenile Justice Shift Amid Warnings From Counties

ST. PAUL, MN (June 11, 2026) On August 1, Minnesota will make one of the most consequential changes to its juvenile justice system in decades.

Beginning that day, children under the age of 13 will no longer be subject to delinquency proceedings in Minnesota courts, ending a legal framework that for generations allowed prosecutors to bring juvenile charges against children as young as 10.

The change marks the formal implementation of Minnesota's "Raise the Age" law, legislation approved by the Minnesota Legislature that increases the state's minimum age of delinquency jurisdiction from 10 to 13 years old. The law removes 10-, 11-, and 12-year-olds from the juvenile court system and redirects them into child welfare, children's mental health, and social service programs.

Supporters describe the measure as a landmark reform grounded in modern neuroscience and child development research. Critics, including county administrators and juvenile justice advisors responsible for implementing the law, warn that Minnesota's social services infrastructure lacks the capacity, staffing, treatment facilities, and secure placement options necessary to absorb the responsibilities being transferred from the juvenile justice system.

As the implementation deadline approaches, the debate has shifted from whether the law should exist to whether the state is prepared to make it work.

A Fundamental Change in How Minnesota Defines Responsibility

For decades, Minnesota law allowed delinquency petitions to be filed against children beginning at age 10.

Starting August 1, that authority largely disappears.

Children under 13 who commit acts that would otherwise be classified as misdemeanors, gross misdemeanors, or felonies if committed by older youth will no longer face prosecution through the juvenile court system. They cannot be adjudicated delinquent, ordered into juvenile detention, or processed through traditional juvenile corrections channels.

Instead, law enforcement agencies will be expected to refer those children to county human services departments and community-based intervention programs. In many cases, the primary legal pathway for intervention will become Minnesota's Child in Need of Protection or Services framework, commonly known as CHIPS.

The legislation reflects a growing national movement toward developmentally informed juvenile justice policies that distinguish between adolescents and pre-adolescent children.

Research cited during legislative debates found that younger children often lack the neurological development necessary to fully understand consequences, regulate impulses, assess risk, or meaningfully participate in court proceedings. Supporters argue that criminal prosecution during those formative years frequently fails to address the underlying causes of harmful behavior and can instead deepen long-term involvement with the justice system.

The Legislature approved the reform with a delayed implementation schedule, giving counties, courts, law enforcement agencies, social workers, and treatment providers nearly two years to prepare for the transition.

Yet many of the agencies responsible for carrying out the law say critical gaps remain.

Why Supporters Say the Old System Was Failing

Advocates of the reform argue that Minnesota's previous approach often produced the appearance of accountability without delivering meaningful intervention.

Among the law's supporters is Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, who has argued that younger children entering delinquency proceedings were frequently found incompetent to stand trial because of their age and developmental limitations.

When a child is ruled incompetent, prosecution cannot continue.

Under the previous framework, that often left courts with limited options. A child could not remain in detention, but neither was there a guaranteed mechanism requiring intensive treatment, family support services, mental health intervention, or long-term supervision.

Supporters contend the new law seeks to reverse that sequence by directing resources to children immediately rather than making services contingent upon a criminal charge.

Their central argument is straightforward: children experiencing serious behavioral problems frequently have histories involving trauma, abuse, neglect, mental illness, educational disruption, family instability, or unmet developmental needs. Addressing those issues through treatment and support services, they argue, is more effective than attempting to prosecute preteens through a system designed primarily for older youth.

Counties Warn of a System Not Ready

While many county leaders support the philosophical goals behind the legislation, they have become increasingly vocal about what they describe as a widening gap between policy aspirations and operational reality.

The Minnesota Association of County Social Service Administrators (MACSSA), representing social service agencies in all 87 counties, has repeatedly urged lawmakers to revisit portions of the law before implementation.

The state's Juvenile Justice Advisory Committee also raised concerns during the legislative process.

Both organizations sought delays, additional resources, or modifications to the statute. None were adopted before the Legislature adjourned.

Their concerns center on one question:

What happens when a child under 13 commits a serious act of violence?

County administrators argue Minnesota currently lacks sufficient residential treatment capacity, secure therapeutic facilities, and specialized intervention programs for youth presenting significant behavioral or public safety concerns.

Across the state, counties have struggled for years with shortages of high-acuity residential treatment beds.

In some cases, children awaiting placement have been housed temporarily in county offices, hotels, emergency shelters, or other nontraditional settings while social workers search for available treatment options.

Administrators fear the August transition could place additional pressure on an already strained system.

No Automatic Exception for Serious Violent Crimes

One of the most contentious aspects of Minnesota's law is the absence of automatic exceptions for certain violent offenses.

Several states that have raised the minimum age of juvenile jurisdiction include carve-outs permitting traditional court involvement in cases involving severe violence, sexual assault, homicide, or similarly serious offenses.

Minnesota's law does not contain such automatic exclusions.

As a result, county leaders argue that social service agencies could be required to manage cases involving serious violence without possessing either the legal authority or the physical infrastructure necessary to securely hold a child who presents an immediate danger to others or to themselves.

Supporters counter that such cases remain extremely rare and should not dictate policy for the broader population of younger children.

Still, the issue remains one of the central tensions surrounding implementation.

The Placement Problem

Beyond philosophical debates lies a practical challenge that county officials describe as perhaps the most significant obstacle facing the new system.

Under the juvenile justice framework, courts could directly order treatment placements when appropriate beds were available.

The child welfare system operates differently.

Federal and state requirements generally require extensive clinical assessments before children can be placed in residential treatment settings. Those assessments often involve evaluations conducted by specially trained professionals known as Qualified Individuals.

Minnesota already faces shortages of those evaluators.

County administrators warn that delays in obtaining assessments, coupled with existing shortages of residential treatment capacity, could slow access to services for some of the very children the law is intended to help.

In effect, officials say, the state is expanding reliance on a system that many counties believe is already operating beyond capacity.

Detention Doors Close

The Minnesota Department of Corrections has confirmed that juvenile detention facilities will no longer be authorized to execute detention holds on children under 13 once the law takes effect.

That change formalizes a reality that has already existed in many parts of the state.

Minnesota's state-operated juvenile correctional facility in Red Wing has not admitted a child under 13 into its cognitive treatment programming in more than two decades.

Nevertheless, local governments say the statutory change removes a legal option that counties previously possessed, even if it was used infrequently.

The practical burden, they argue, will increasingly fall upon county social workers, behavioral health professionals, crisis response teams, and child welfare agencies.

The State's Next Test

State agencies have begun offering training sessions to law enforcement officers, county human services personnel, court officials, and juvenile justice practitioners ahead of the August implementation date.

The goal is to create a coordinated response framework that emphasizes intervention, treatment, family support, mental health services, and community-based rehabilitation rather than prosecution.

Whether those systems are prepared remains the central question.

The debate surrounding the law ultimately reflects two competing realities.

The first is a growing body of scientific evidence suggesting that very young children are poorly served by criminal prosecution and that earlier intervention may reduce future involvement in the justice system.

The second is the warning from frontline administrators that successful intervention requires infrastructure, staffing, treatment capacity, and funding that many counties say do not currently exist.

Beginning August 1, Minnesota will become one of a growing number of states choosing treatment over prosecution for its youngest offenders.

The months that follow may determine whether the state's social service network is prepared to carry the responsibilities that once belonged to the juvenile justice system.

For county officials, lawmakers, social workers, law enforcement agencies, and the families of children in crisis, that question is no longer theoretical.

It is about to become reality.

MinneapoliMedia | Community. Culture. Civic Life.