Just the image of a human being led around in shackles conjures an immediate impression: the person has been captured; they've lost freedom of movement because they've done something wrong. It suggests that a person must have behaved like an animal to need to be chained like one.

Watching a defendant shuffle into court in chains can evoke a subconscious, reflexive presumption of guilt — even in a judge hearing a case in juvenile court.

That's among the solid reasons a proposal to end the indiscriminate shackling of juveniles in court merits approval at the Legislature. Rep. Jamie Long, DFL-Minneapolis, authored legislation to limit use of restraints for young people when they appear in court. Earlier this year, a bipartisan group of state lawmakers worked on the bill that would end the demonizing, inhumane practice.

Long told an editorial writer that he co-chaired a House criminal justice reform group with Rep. John Poston, R-Lake Shore, to find common ground on issues. He said that juvenile justice was important to many members of both parties because they understand that youth brain development differs from that of adults and that young offenders deserve a rehabilitative approach.

"We should be helping youth get second chances and support, rather than putting them on a counterproductive path,'' said Long, noting that being shackled can cause long-term harm to kids. "You're shamed and made to feel guilty before you've even had a chance for trial."

In Minnesota, there is no statewide policy on shackling youth. Practices vary widely from county to county. Hennepin, Ramsey and St. Louis counties, for example, don't use restraints unless permission is explicitly granted by a judge. Yet in some other Minnesota counties, teens are regularly cuffed by their hands and feet — and sometimes secured by a belly chain — while being transported or appearing in court.

That means young people charged for the same alleged offense can be treated differently depending upon their location.

Shackling can be especially damaging psychologically for Black and other youth of color, who are arrested and held at higher rates. Minnesota, meanwhile, is behind the curve nationally on restraining youth in court. At least 32 states and the District of Columbia have limited the automatic shackling of youth through legislative action or court order. The U.S. Supreme Court and the Minnesota Supreme Court have separately ruled that routine shackling of adult defendants is unconstitutional because it undermines the presumption of innocence in jurors' minds.

It's important to note that the reform legislation being considered allows for exceptions. The bill would ban the use of restraints on juveniles except when a judge deems them necessary to protect public safety or prevent flight.

It's past time for Minnesota to get on board with treating young alleged offenders more humanely. As part of the overall public safety bill that supporters hope will pass soon, state lawmakers should approve limiting the use of shackles on juveniles.