I applaud this judge.  Oh, for more just like him.  Teen Challenge has been an option for many over the years and the courts have used this option to the benefit of those involved.  The sentence is jail with the option of being suspended if the guilty party agrees to the terms of the suspension.  The sentence isn't church, church is a condition to the suspension of the sentence.  Let's keep this in perspective.

If I were the judge, I would limit the option to a couple of good Bible based congregations that indeed would be able to reach the young boy and lead him to a life of commitment.  I also would include the parents attendance as a component to the condition of suspension.  The parents are absent in so many ways for a 17 year old to be drinking in the first place.

I doubt the sentence is "illegal".  If the ACLU and others don't like the condition of the suspension, then I suppose they could get it struck down and the boy will go to jail.  Isn't that a brilliant outcome to strive for???