Austin's Juvenile Court Resists Publicly Addressing Criticisms of Racial Bias

Gardner Betts Juvenile Justice Center (Photo by Jana Birchum)

The Juvenile Court doesn't get a lot of press, but it plays a critical role in this county's justice system. Judges in these courts hold the lives of their young defendants in their hands – most are poor kids of color, and many have experienced trauma. Judges can decide whether they remain in the care of their parents or go to foster homes, whether they go back to school or are jailed, and whether to approve or throw out their plea agreements. Bias in those decisions could be devastating.

Fortunately, Travis County's Juvenile Court and its presiding Judge Rhonda Hur­ley have invested heavily in equity-­focused work. Unfortunately, credible concerns about bias still exist. Several juvenile court attorneys told us last month that the Juven­ile Board's closed-door hiring process for associate judges has for years favored white candidates over similarly qualified candidates of color. This lack of diversity and transparency, they say, is especially problematic given the diverse and vulnerable population these judges are responsible for.

In the four weeks since we reported those concerns, the court has resisted publicly addressing bias in hiring – despite one judge's request for public discussion at an upcoming meeting of the Juvenile Board, which oversees the court. All 21 elected district judges in the county sit on that board; a smaller subset makes hiring recommendations to it. Judge Aurora Martinez Jones is not in that smaller group, having only been elected in 2020, but she presides over Child Protective Services cases that can overlap with juvenile court cases.

In a June 20 letter to board Chair Hurley, Martinez Jones suggested a special called meeting to publicly discuss three issues: "community concerns related to Juvenile Board decisions," an update on the formation of a diversity-focused workgroup, and the latest news in the years-long development of a "master plan" for juvenile facilities.

Hurley asked the board not to set up a special meeting. "There may be better forums to further discuss these matters given the nature of Juvenile Board meetings," she wrote in a detailed memo June 26. She told us that she and Martinez Jones had scheduled a private meeting. When asked if she'd include Martinez Jones' requested items on the August meeting agenda, she told us that "agendas for the board meeting are not prepared or finalized until a week before the meeting."

Hurley did, however, address Martinez Jones' requests in her June 26 memo, laying out several efforts to address racial disparities in the court. Hurley pointed out that she and juvenile probation staff attended an anti-racist certificate program at George­town University this April. The capstone project for that program chosen by Hurley's team will be illuminating if made public – by the end of the year, the team will have reviewed "every decision point, including judge decisions, from the time a youth enters the system to the exit point to determine where and why disparities are occurring," Hurley wrote. "This is a huge but important undertaking."

The memo did not explicitly address potential bias in hiring judges. Hurley wrote that "time would be better spent reviewing the hiring policy and DEI efforts rather than talking about past events that we have no control over."

As for the Chronicle's reporting, Hurley called the headline – "Juvenile Court's Sec­ret Hiring Process for Judges Falls Under Scrutiny" – "sensationalist." She also took issue with Martinez Jones' description of community concerns. "I think we need to be careful not to equate the comments of an attorney or reporter to public perception or concerns." (Our sources included five attorneys with experience in the court.)

Addressing Martinez Jones' question about future facilities, Hurley wrote that since April, she and a small team of county employees have been meeting with architects weekly to hammer out elements of the plan. The new facilities could include nonsecure (e.g., non-jail) housing for kids, paired with an activity center. Other stakeholders will be brought into discussion later, she wrote. As for the diversity, equity, and inclusion workgroup, Hurley wrote, "I understand that a preliminary group has been formed or is forming but have no information about who is on that committee." She ended the four-page memo saying that despite "rumors to the contrary," all juvenile judges "work very hard and are dedicated to the youth and families in this system."

"There is no one more dedicated than me to the youth and families in the juvenile justice system," Hurley wrote. "But I cannot do this work without your support. I will be deciding my future very soon. I know everyone is wondering, but for all the reasons stated in this memo, it is a much more difficult decision to make than I ever thought it would be. The work, while difficult, has truly become a part of my heart and soul."