Do Deceptive Interrogation Bans Affect Case Resolution? Evidence From Juvenile Justice Reforms

Abstract

This study examines whether state laws restricting deceptive interrogation tactics with juveniles reduce case resolution. Using NIBRS data from 2021 to 2024 and staggered adoption across nine states, we estimate effects on arrest clearances and prosecution-declined exceptional clearances for juvenile-involved serious offenses. Across Bayesian difference-in-differences, state-specific Bayesian synthetic control models, placebo tests, and robustness checks, arrest clearances do not decline after adoption within the study period. Estimates are null to modestly positive, including within individual treated states. Prosecution-declined clearances fall in treated states, but adult-offender placebo and triple-difference analyses show this pattern is not juvenile-specific. The findings suggest that juvenile deception restrictions do not impose a measurable system-level cost in case resolution.