I have to agree with this. A second year bird should be called immature not juvenile.
Well I know Americans have different ways of labelling plumages but to say a 2cy Bald Eagle in juvenile plumage cannot be regarded as a ‘juvenile’ makes absolutely no sense from an ornithological perspective - at least in how we approach moult definitions etc outside of America.
A bird is recognised as a ‘juvenile’ because of its plumage NOT it’s age. Raptors as a rule carry juvenile plumage for the first 12 months of its life from nestling. A Bald eagle in March of it’s second calendar year is only approximately 8 months old and still in juvenile plumage. Some smaller species of raptor, like falcons and harriers, will have a partial body moult in their first winter, so will be regarded as in a transitional plumage (between juvenile and first basic).
A Bald Eagle does not start moulting out of its juvenile plumage until about 12 months after fledging ie in their 1st summer (2cy - July/August). Feel free to check any of Derek Forsman’s publications on raptors - Flight Identification of Raptors 2016, is full of images of various raptors (including White-tailed Eagles) referred to as ‘juveniles’ despite being in the Spring of their second calendar year.
Perhaps those people saying I am wrong here, would please explain how they would define a ‘juvenile’ bird?
Edit -
Btw - if the date that the photo was taken was actually the 3rd of December, rather than the 12th of March (given the American habit of writing the month before the day), my point remains. The OP would still be a juvenile in juvenile plumage but in its 1cy. not 2cy