Archived Advisory Opinions At-A-Glance

Any state may submit an informal written request to the Executive Director for assistance in interpreting the rules of this compact. The Executive Director may seek the assistance of legal counsel, the Executive Committee, or both, in interpreting the rules. The Executive Committee may authorize its standing committees to assist in interpreting the rules. Interpretations of the rules shall be issued in writing by the Executive Director or the Executive Committee and shall be circulated to all of the states.

Disclaimer: The following Advisory Opinions were superseded by amendments to the ICJ Rules and have been archived. Superseded/archived opinions are available upon request.  Contact ICJadmin@juvenilecompact.org

 

4-2018
Rule(s):
5-101(7), 6-102
Released
Requester:
Executive Committee
At Issue:

Whether a person should be returned as a juvenile when being detained as a juvenile in the holding state, but has an outstanding warrant from an adult court in the home state.

Archived:
3-2019
Rule(s):
7-104
Released
Requester:
Kentucky
At Issue:

Can a person subject to a juvenile warrant be released on bond when he is considered an adult under the laws of the demanding and holding states based on the age of majority?

Archived:
1-2014
Rule(s):
8-101(3)
Released
Requester:
Rhode Island
At Issue:

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) as it relates to youth and family information.

Archived:
1-2015
Rule(s):
2-102(1), 2-106
Released
Requester:
Executive Committee
At Issue:

ICJ authority to conduct records checks for another state on juveniles not subject to ICJ.

Archived:
5-2018
Rule(s):
1-101, 6-103
Released
Requester:
Executive Committee
At Issue:

Does the ICJ apply to a juvenile who leaves home with permission of the guardian, but refuses to return when the guardian directs?

Archived:
1-2017
Rule(s):
7-103
Released
Requester:
Rules Committee
At Issue:

Demanding/Sending State’s Authority to seek return of a juvenile in cases where charges are pending in the Receiving/Holding State under ICJ Rule 7-103

Archived:
2-2014
Rule(s):
5-101(3)
Released
Requester:
Minnesota
At Issue:

Whether or not the term 'sanctions' used in Rule 5-101(3) includes detention time.

Archived:
4-2012
Rule(s):
ICJ Rule 5-102*
Released
Requester:
Wisconsin
At Issue:

*Rule 5-102 was relocated to 8-101 as of April 1, 2014

Is a travel permit required to be issued, pursuant to ICJ Rule 5-102 for transfer of a juvenile sex offender from Wisconsin to Minnesota who is the subject of a delinquency petition, but who has not been adjudicated?

Once the juvenile is adjudicated delinquent, can the juvenile be allowed to return to Minnesota with his family while Wisconsin makes its request for transfer of supervision of the youth to Minnesota?

Archived:
2-2011
Rule(s):
Determining which juveniles the new ICJ applies
Released
Requester:
Hawaii
At Issue:

Does the Interstate Compact for Juveniles ('ICJ') apply to the interstate transfer of supervision of delinquent juveniles, under juvenile jurisdiction in Hawaii, who are placed in a private residential treatment program?

Does the ICJ apply to the interstate transfer of supervision of delinquent juveniles, under juvenile jurisdiction in Hawaii, who are place in public institutions

Archived:
2-2010
Rule(s):
ICJ Rules
Released
Requester:
National Office
At Issue:

Which Rules Apply According to Effective Date

Since the new rules promulgated by the Commission do not become effective until March 1, 2010, which Rules apply if a referral is received prior to that date, but the placement occurs after March 1, 2010.

Archived:
3-2010
Rule(s):
5-101, 4-106.4
Released
Requester:
Compliance Committee
At Issue:

Rule 5-101: The sending state's ability to "override" a denial; who has decision making authority to "override" a denial; and, Adam Walsh Act implications

Archived: