The Supreme Court and the Transformation of Juvenile Sentencing
"In the past decade, the Supreme Court has transformed the constitutional
landscape of juvenile crime regulation. In three strongly worded
opinions, the Court held that imposing harsh criminal sentences on
juvenile offenders violates the Eighth Amendment prohibition against
cruel and unusual punishment. In combination, these cases create a
special status for juveniles under Eighth Amendment doctrine as a
category of offenders whose culpability is mitigated by their youth and
immaturity, even for the most serious offenses. The Court also
emphasized that juveniles are more likely to reform than adult
offenders, and that most should be given a meaningful opportunity to
demonstrate that they have done so. In short, because of young
offenders’ developmental immaturity, harsh sentences that may be
suitable for adult criminals are seldom appropriate for juveniles.
These opinions announce a powerful constitutional principle—that 'children are different' for purposes of criminal punishment. In
articulating this principle, the Supreme Court has also provided general
guidance to courts sentencing juveniles and to lawmakers charged with
implementing the rulings. At the same time, the Court did not directly
address the specifics of implementation and it left many questions
unanswered about the implications of the opinions for juvenile
sentencing regulation. In the years since Roper, Graham, and Miller,
courts and legislatures have struggled to interpret the opinions and to
create procedures and policies that are compatible with constitutional
principles and doctrine.
This report addresses the key issues facing courts and legislatures
under this new constitutional regime, and provides guidance based on the
Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment analysis and on the principles the
Court has articulated."
View the Report
No comments:
Post a Comment