It has long been a concern that young adults are not as civically engaged as other age groups. This historical pattern held true for the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, despite increased voter turnout overall. A group that might be particularly at risk for low voting turnouts is that of justice-involved young adults. Although several studies have assessed voting behaviors among community youth, it remains unclear to what degree justice-involved young adults are civically engaged, and how contact with the justice system affects their voting behaviors. This is concerning, as this population is arguably more directly affected by voting outcomes because of their close association with the law, which dictated how they were processed, sentenced, and their conditions of release. Using data collected after the 2016 general election, this study aimed to understand the effect of justice system involvement on young voters. Additionally, it served to introduce a profile of the justice-involved youth voter, assessing basic demographic characteristics as predictors of voting behavior and providing a descriptive overview of the political attitudes of participants. Research was conducted within a racially diverse sample of young adult men (N = 927) who were part of the Crossroads Study, an ongoing longitudinal study following 1,216 participants (initially aged 13-17) for seven years after their initial arrest for a moderate offense. Results showed the high-risk young adults voted at lower rates than community young adults. Additionally, 46% of the sample reported being not at all interested in politics. Similar to the community sample, age and SES were found to be predictors of voting. Race and prior offending, however, were not significantly associated with voting behavior. Although the direct association between processing type and voting behavior was not significant in the fully adjusted model, the indirect effect between processing type and voting behavior (through arrest count) was significant. Formal processing was associated with more arrests, and higher arrest count was subsequently linked to a lower likelihood of voting. Number of re-arrests explained 59% of the association between processing type and behavior.