Le cerveau «immature» : genèse et diffusion d’un nouveau discours social sur les jeunes délinquants aux États-Unis
This dissertation investigates the role of neuroscientific knowledge about the adolescent brain in the contemporary mutations of the field of juvenile justice in the United States. More specifically, it analyzes the socio-historical dynamics whereby the theory of adolescent brain immaturity came to play a key role in three Supreme Court rulings which, between 2005 and 2012, made the death penalty and life imprisonment unconstitutional for juvenile offenders. Located at the intersection of the sociology of science and the sociology of the penal field, this dissertation examines this “legal triptych” in light of the history of the juvenile justice system in the United States. I argue that the contemporary debates surrounding the age of criminal responsibility are the latest manifestation of the symbolic struggles that various fractions of the dominant class have historically waged around the definition of the “problem” of juvenile delinquency.  Following a socio-historical perspective, this dissertation traces the oppositions and alliances between scientists, philanthropic foundations, learned societies, government agencies, elected politicians, and legal actors who have shaped the trajectory of the field of juvenile justice in the U. S. One key focus of the dissertation is to examine the “work of symbolic manipulation” (Bourdieu, 2001) of the “new reformers”, an heterogenous alliance of agents from the dominant class who, at the turn of the 21st century, constructed and disseminated a new social discourse locating the causes of juvenile delinquency in the brain of adolescents. To address this focus, I formulate a critique of the epistemological foundations and political uses of this discourse. I give an account of the power relations, notably of age, class and race, that this discourse of immaturity helps to reinforce, despite the progressive ambitions of its promoters. The analyses presented in this dissertation are based on a diversified material combining judicial archives, scientific articles, grey literature and 37 semi-structured interviews conducted with scholars, judges, members of philanthropic foundations, of activist groups and of government agencies. The heterogeneity of this material provides the means to track how the discourse of immaturity shifts from the laboratory to the courtroom or from the U.S. Congress to correctional institutions. It allows me to account for the specific field logics that generate the action of these agents, as well as the cross-cutting logics that lead them to ally themselves to act politically in order to “save” juvenile offenders.
neurosciences adolescent brain neuroscience neurolaw penal field U.S. Supreme Court juvenile justice field theory