The facts are more complicated than often presented
Concerns about increases in youth crime have a long and not-so-distinguished pedigree, from John DiIulio’s warning of “super-predators” that never came to be to perennially alarmist New York Post headlines.
A pair of stories in the New York Times — one reporting on apparent rises in youth crime, and the other reporting on violence in the City’s youth detention facilities — assert that New York is witnessing serious increases in juvenile violence. In both instances, the state’s Raise the Age law made an appearance as a potential explanation for the violence. The statute, which took effect in 2018, raised the age at which a person could be criminally prosecuted for most crimes from 16 to 18, a standard that had already been set by all but one other state in the nation.
So what is actually going on? And is Raise the Age to blame?
To start, it is worth remembering a few basic points:
- Violent crime is largely a crime of youth — meaning, no matter what period one studies, it’s adolescents and young adults ages 18-24 who disproportionately commit offenses. Young people typically age out of criminal behavior as they get older.
- That said, violent crimes committed by youth under the age of 18 comprise a small part of all violent crimes committed. In 2023, they accounted for 10.2% of violent crime arrests.
- Recently in New York City, youth under the age of 18 have represented a smaller percentage of all those arrested for violent crimes compared to years prior to Raise the Age.
- The composition of New York City’s youth detention facilities has changed over the years, as has the composition of those held in adult jails, with people charged with serious offenses now comprising the overwhelming majority of those detained.
The first New York Times article, titled “Number of Young People Accused of Serious Crimes Surges in New York City,” says there has been a 25% rise in major crimes involving juveniles “accused or arrested” between 2018 and 2024 year-to-date, highlighting significant increases in robberies and felony assaults. However, between descriptions in the subheading to the body of the article, the distinction between arrest numbers and crime complaints was unclear. Additionally, the reported figures initially referenced 2017 crime data and larger increases, instead of 2018 and more modest increases. (The Times recently issued an extensive correction.)
To fully comprehend what the headlines miss, it’s important to understand three truths about crime numbers in general and juvenile crime numbers in particular.
Snapshots obscure overall trends
While year-over-year comparisons provide a snapshot of crime trends, they can obscure important fluctuations and behaviors in the intervening years. After the implementation of Raise the Age in 2018 and 2019, juvenile arrests for major crimes decreased. The last full year unaffected by Raise the Age, 2017, saw 5,097 arrests of individuals under 18. By 2023, that number had dropped to 4,872, a 4.4% decline. Juvenile arrests for major crimes, while fluctuating, have trended downward and not surpassed 2017 numbers. Arrests dipped in 2018, rose slightly in 2019, then plummeted during the pandemic from 2020 to 2022, before rising again in 2023 — though still remaining below 2017 levels.
While the Times highlights an increase between 2018 and 2024 year-to-date, the starting point chosen for any analysis matters a great deal. Indeed, arrests of juveniles for violent crimes — including murder, rape, robbery and felony assault — declined -4.9% between 2017 and 2023. In 2017, there were 3,712 juvenile arrests for these crimes, compared to 3,531 in 2023. A recent analysis by John Jay’s Research and Evaluation Center suggests that attributing New York’s violent crime increases specifically to young people is inappropriate, as arrest trends for those under 18 generally mirrored the scale and direction of adult trends during the rise in violent crime.
Any number of factors in addition to the Raise the Age law can influence these trends. The pandemic significantly disrupted schools, where much juvenile crime occurs, both on school grounds and during commutes. New crime trends or viral phenomena can further drive increases. For instance, the “Kia Challenge” — a viral TikTok trend that shows kids how to steal cars — is likely one factor behind a 78.7% rise in juvenile arrests for grand larceny auto in 2023 compared to 2017.
Compared to what?
While it certainly matters that more young people are being arrested for committing crimes in 2024 as compared to 2018, this increase must be put in perspective — in this case, the perspective that more criminal arrests are happening of people at all ages, with juveniles making up a shrinking share of those totals. In a world of tradeoffs, the question is not just what problematic trends are happening, but whether a given trend is better or worse than other trends that often compete for the same resources.
Juveniles have been contributing to a shrinking share of major crime over time. In 2017, people under 18 accounted for 12.3% of all major crime arrests. By 2023, that proportion had dropped to 9.1%. As of September 30, 2024, it has edged up slightly to 9.7%. The same pattern holds for violent crime arrests. Juveniles represented 14.2% of violent crime arrests in New York City in 2017, dropping to 10.2% in 2023.
As of Sept. 30, 2024, major crime arrests have risen by 25.2% compared to 2018, consistent with New York Times reporting. However, the 25-44 age group saw a much steeper increase using that same snapshot, with major crime arrests surging by 54.7%. Their share of major arrests grew by 5.9 percentage points — from 47.3% of all arrests in 2018 to 53.2% in 2024. This doesn’t rule out concerns about the Raise the Age law, but it suggests that other factors are driving overall crime and arrest trends.
Juveniles represented 14.2% of violent crime arrests in New York City in 2017, dropping to 10.2% in 2023.
The City must calibrate its response appropriately. While the recent rise in juvenile arrests indicates an issue worth investigating, the data suggests a more urgent concern lies with the older cohort, which shows a much larger increase in arrests.
Arrest data has significant limits
Those who analyze crime trends should also be cautious about conflating arrest data with overall crime levels for several reasons. First, arrests reflect a subset of all crimes. The majority of major crimes in New York City go unsolved, which means that no arrest is made. This creates a significant gap between reported crime occurrences — reflected in crime complaint data, which doesn’t reliably include the alleged perpetrator’s age — and recorded arrests.
Second, arrest patterns are influenced by policing practices, such as targeted enforcement in certain areas or communities. For example, increased police presence in high-crime neighborhoods may lead to more arrests, but this does not necessarily mean crime is increasing, only that more crimes are being detected and arrests being made. Additionally, arrests can be affected by policy changes, such as the ratcheting up or dialing back of stop-and-frisk policies or decriminalization of certain offenses.
Clearance rates for major crimes fell at the onset of the pandemic but have since recovered, and now exceed pre-pandemic levels. This improvement suggests that the police are making more arrests in relation to the number of crimes. Consequently, the rise in youth arrests could be attributed at least partially to better police work, rather than a significant increase in crime itself.
Implementing Raise the Age
Despite this complicated picture of under-18 crime statistics, there’s no question implementing Raise the Age has been challenging. In 2021, the New York City Criminal Justice Agency (CJA) conducted a comparative analysis of recidivism among 16-year-olds before and after the implementation of Raise the Age. The study examined rearrest rates for the first year of Raise the Age, comparing them to those of 16-year-olds arrested the prior year and to 17-year-olds arrested during the same period, who were not yet subject to Raise the Age. The findings showed that young people arrested during the first year of Raise the Age were more likely to be rearrested, including for felonies and violent felony offenses, than their counterparts. Specifically, 48% of 16-year-olds arrested post-Raise the Age were rearrested for any offense, 35% for felonies and 27% for violent felonies — compared to 39%, 26% and 18%, respectively, in the year prior. Among 17-year-olds, first-year Raise the Age data showed rearrest rates of 40% for any offense, 28% for felonies and 19% for violent felonies compared to 38%, 25% and 16% for the previous year.
Among other things, the CJA report highlights the relative absence of data on case processing and outcomes in Family Court, where these juvenile criminal cases are now adjudicated. This lack of information obscures analysis on case adjustments, placements, services provided to youth and the accuracy of risk assessments. This makes it harder to find and fix problems with the implementation.
Understanding the recent increase in juvenile arrests requires more data.
There have been other gaps in implementation. A recent NYC Department of Investigation report found that juvenile centers, such as Horizon and Crossroads, were not prepared for the influx of those charged with serious offenses. They were short-staffed and struggled to handle a growing population of older, more violent detainees who would previously have been sent to jails on Rikers Island. Additionally, funding for Raise the Age-related services has fallen short, particularly in the five boroughs.
Understanding the recent increase in juvenile arrests requires more data. Are recidivism rates rising? How many arrests involve first-time offenders and how many involve persistent offenders? Are there more multiple-offender robberies? How many kids are placed where? And, for what offenses? Without this data, it is difficult to attribute any particular cause to the recent increase in juvenile arrests or have a sense as to whether we should be worried.
While the city is always attentive to crime, the question of where to concentrate enforcement and other interventions is essential to creating effective crime reduction strategies. Without better data, we risk disproportionately focusing on youth crime and misallocating limited public safety resources on a demographic that accounts for about 9% of major crime arrests.