Are there close-in-age or Romeo-and-Juliet laws that allow minors to consent to sex with 20-year-olds?

1. What “Romeo‑and‑Juliet” or close‑in‑age laws do and don’t do

Romeo‑and‑Juliet provisions are statutory or doctrinal exceptions designed to avoid draconian penalties (including long prison terms and sex‑offender registration) for consensual sexual activity between young people who are near in age, but they do not universally redefine the age of consent; rather they create defenses, reduced charges, or pathways to avoid registry in certain circumstances ^{[5] [2] [1]}. Thirty states are identified as having some form of age‑gap law or close‑in‑age exemption—however, the nature of those exemptions (criminal defense, affirmative defense, petition to remove registry obligations) differs from state to state, so the presence of an exception in principle does not guarantee the same result in practice ^{[1] [6]}.

2. Can a 20‑year‑old legally have sex with a minor under these rules?

The short answer is: sometimes, depending on the state, the ages involved, and the statutory gap permitted; it is not a blanket “yes.” In several states the permitted age gap is three to four years, which would make intercourse between a 20‑year‑old and a 17‑year‑old lawful in some jurisdictions but illegal in others where the age of consent is 18 and no close‑in‑age exception covers that gap ^{[5] [4] [1]}. Some states go further: for example, Florida’s framework allows someone who was no older than 23 at the time of sexual activity with a 16‑ or 17‑year‑old to petition to remove sex‑offender registration requirements—an outcome that affects consequences though not necessarily the original criminal charge structure ^[7].

3. Concrete state contrasts that illustrate the patchwork

Texas’s statute is commonly cited for allowing a three‑year age gap in certain circumstances (making some 20/17 pairings legally defensible where Texas’s age‑of‑consent rules and the gap align) while New York does not have a single “Romeo‑and‑Juliet” statute but explicitly allows consideration of ages and a reduced‑penalty approach for consensual relationships where the minor is 15 or older and the gap is under five years ^{[5] [3]}. By contrast, California is described by defense practitioners as lacking a Romeo‑and‑Juliet exception, meaning statutory rape under Penal Code 261.5 applies even where the parties are close in age unless prosecutorial discretion or other remedies intervene ^[4].

4. Caveats, agendas and why definitive answers require local law

Public information about these rules often comes from law‑firm guides and legal‑advice sites that both summarize statutes and advertise representation, so readers should treat examples as directional rather than exhaustive and be mindful of commercial bias in many online explainers ^{[8] [9] [10]}. Because these laws vary by state and can involve distinctions between an affirmative defense, sentencing relief, or a registry petition, whether a 20‑year‑old is legally protected in any given case cannot be answered without citing the specific state statute and precise ages involved ^{[6] [7] [1]}.

5. Practical conclusion and next steps

Where a 20‑year‑old’s conduct with a minor is at issue, the relevant questions are the minor’s age, the state where the conduct occurred, and the specific close‑in‑age language or remedies in that state’s code; national summaries show many (about 30) states have some close‑in‑age mechanism but the thresholds differ, so a case‑specific statutory read or local counsel is necessary for certainty ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Reported examples—Texas’s three‑year gap, New York’s reduced‑penalty approach for certain 15+ minors, and Florida’s petition option up to age 23—illustrate the range but do not replace a state‑by‑state legal analysis ^{[5] [3] [7]}.