As American society has reckoned with the harmful effects of mass incarceration, there has been a push to consider alternative forms of achieving justice. Restorative justice is one such method. A transformative approach to conflict resolution inspired by the traditions and practices of indigenous peoples, restorative justice offers a comprehensive means of addressing harm, emphasizing the community, rather than the single act that caused harm. Many jurisdictions and communities have turned to restorative justice to divert cases from the punitive criminal legal system. While there are variations in programs and approaches, many communities integrate restorative justice practices as a means of addressing harm caused by young people. Applying a restorative approach, these initiatives seek to undermine the harmful, life-long effects that interaction with the criminal legal system imposes upon young people. These restorative alternatives operate against the backdrop of the punitive system, leading scholars, practitioners, and community members to raise concerns about the lack of procedural protections in place for individuals proceeding through these diversionary programs. Because the proceedings are less adversarial in nature, the legal community has sounded the alarm about the potential for self-incrimination, coercion, and less zealous advocacy by counsel. This unease is further compounded by the fact that failure to complete the requirements of these programs can lead to a referral back to the traditional criminal legal system. The Restorative Justice Community Court of Chicago (RJCC) is one such alternative. Created in 2017, there are now three RJCCs operating in the North Lawndale, Englewood, and Avondale communities. This Comment seeks to analyze the due process concerns raised by members of the legal and restorative justice communities through the lens of the North Lawndale RJCC. Drawing on knowledge gained through my personal observations and interviews, it is clear that due process violations do not present a substantial threat to the success of the RJCC. Programs like the RJCC operate in a gray zone between the legal rigidity of the criminal legal system and the community-oriented approach adopted by the restorative justice community. This framework urges us to evaluate these programs through an alternative lens so that we can better understand their contributions to furthering justice while remaining aware of their shortcomings to create fully restorative spaces.

随着美国社会已经意识到大规模监禁的有害影响，人们开始推动考虑实现正义的替代形式。恢复性司法就是这样一种方法。恢复性司法是解决冲突的变革性方法，其灵感来自土著人民的传统和做法，它提供了解决伤害的综合手段，强调社区，而不是造成伤害的单一行为。许多司法管辖区和社区已转向恢复性司法，以将案件从惩罚性刑事法律体系中转移出来。尽管方案和方法各有不同，但许多社区将恢复性司法做法纳入其中，作为解决年轻人造成的伤害的一种手段。这些举措采用恢复性方法，旨在消除有害的、与刑事法律系统的互动对青少年产生终生影响。这些恢复性替代方案是在惩罚制度的背景下运作的，导致学者、从业者和社区成员对通过这些转移计划进行的个人缺乏程序保护表示担忧。由于诉讼程序本质上不那么对抗性，法律界对律师可能出现的自证其罪、胁迫和不那么热心的辩护敲响了警钟。如果未能完成这些计划的要求，可能会导致退回到传统的刑事法律体系，这一事实进一步加剧了这种不安。芝加哥恢复性司法社区法院 (RJCC) 就是这样的替代方案之一。创建于2017年，目前，北朗代尔 (North Lawndale)、恩格尔伍德 (Englewood) 和埃文代尔 (Avondale) 社区共有 3 个 RJCC。本评论旨在通过北朗代尔 RJCC 的视角分析法律和恢复性司法界成员提出的正当程序问题。根据我个人的观察和采访获得的知识，很明显，违反正当程序并不会对 RJCC 的成功构成重大威胁。像 RJCC 这样的计划在刑事法律体系的法律刚性和恢复性司法界采用的以社区为导向的方法之间的灰色地带运作。