PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2427-2428)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 6, 2017
Prohibiting Detention of Youth Status Offenders Act of 2017
This bill amends the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to modify the deinstitutionalization of status offenders (DSO) core requirement with which a state must comply to receive funds under the Formula Grant Program. The DSO core requirement prohibits the secure detention or confinement of a juvenile who commits a status offense (i.e., an offense that would not be a crime if committed by an adult).
This bill eliminates an exception to the DSO core requirement that permits the secure detention or confinement of an out-of-state runaway youth.
It also eliminates, not later than one year after enactment, an exception to the DSO core requirement that permits the secure detention or confinement of a juvenile status offender who violates a valid court order. Until then, use of the valid court order exception to securely detain or confine a juvenile status offender must comply with additional requirements, such as issuance of a written court order, a three-day maximum length of detention, and a plan for release.
People & committees
Sen. Casey, Robert P., Jr. [D-PA] · D–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2427-2428)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.866 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.866 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.866 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.866 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.