Not a Subscriber? Register Now
Juveniles with Mandatory Life Sentences Should be ResentencedOctober 19, 2012 by John Lash by John Lash
The recent decision (reported here by the L.A. Times) by the U.S. Supreme Court to ban mandatory juvenile life without parole has been rightly celebrated as a victory by activists and others interested in progressive policies. The ruling has left many scratching their heads in its wake though, mostly because the court ruled the sentences unconstitutional, but did not directly assign a process for revisiting the cases, many of which are decades old.
A few opponents to the ruling are even contending that it cannot be applied retroactively. Youth Radio interviewed Jennifer Bishop, the President of theNational Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers. Ms. Bishop, who has previously written for JJIE, is a victims’ rights advocate whose group focuses on those most affected by juvenile murderers: families. The group’s website, teenkillers.org, offers links to analyses of the court’s decision that argue for letting current sentences stand, a very narrow interpretation of the ruling.
In Michigan, second only to Pennsylvania in the number of affected prisoners, the court of Appeals is hearing a case that, “may shape the fate of 368 prisoners serving mandatory life sentences…” committed as juveniles. Jonathan Oosting, writing for MLive, details the difficulties facing the court. These same difficulties will be faced in jurisdictions around the country. Some states will use legislation to move into compliance, as Reutersexplained in a September article on California’s new law covering relevant cases.
Others, at least for a time, will depend on courts to solve the problem. This will have its own difficulties, since in many ways this is asking the court to create law. The presiding appeals court judge in Michigan, Michael J. Talbot, points out that it is unclear whether or not the Supreme Court’s decision was substantive or, “merely a procedural issue.” If it is substantive, it affects all cases. If not, then the ruling would only apply to the cases before the court and to future cases. Talbot, speaking about the decision, said, “If Kagan had the votes, she would have said it was substantive. But it's not clear because she didn't."
This confusion is unfortunate, and it means that advocates, both for and against the ruling have a lot of work left to do. It is likely that these cases will drag on for years. For me the decision is easy. I favor resentencing of all affected prisoners. I realize that this will put a burden on the courts and everyone else involved, most unfortunately of all on the victims.
I see no other way forward though. The trend in the court’s recent decisions is clear, and argues for taking into account the differences between juveniles and adults. This way of viewing young people will likely continue, and it is in fact supported by science and research. Let’s take the time, and the trouble, to look at these cases now. The states will still be allowed to implement life without parole if they deem it necessary, but those serving the sentences, most of whom are adults now, deserve the chance to have their cases looked at through this evolving lens of understanding into how the adolescent mind works, and how it can change.
You must Login before leaving a comment.
JJ Today Notes
John Lash | 12/06/13Moving from the Traditional Idea of Punishment to ... More
Judge George W. Timberlake, Ret. | 12/04/13Holidays in the Juvenile Justice System... More
John Lash | 11/29/13At Thanksgiving, Reflecting on Justice for Native ... More
John Lash | 11/22/13Too Many of Our Kids Up Against a Stacked Deck... More
John Lash | 11/15/13To Understand Juvenile Detention, Listen to the Ki... More
John Lash | 11/08/13Transforming How We Treat Incarcerated LGBTQ Youth... More
John Lash | 11/01/13Pennsylvania’s Miller Ruling is Unfair... More
Latest Tweets From Youth Today
Moving from the Traditional Idea of Punishment to a More Measured Response
Written by John Lash | 12/06/2013
One of the most entrenched ideas in American culture is that punishment is effective both at creating justice and at affecting change in those who do wrong. The basic concept is that when someone does something I don’t like I hurt them, or threaten to hurt them, and they change. Obviously this kind of violence does work, but it is limited by my ability and willingness to harm you.
We see this idea demonstrated in everything from child rearing to war. We also see it played out in the realm of juvenile justice policy. In the ‘90s it was the impetus for many of the changes to juvenile codes that made it easier to transfer kid...
Report Urges Ban on Detaining Status Offenders
Gary Gately | 12/05/2013 | Full Article
Nation's Largest School Police Force, in L.A., Will Stop Ticketing Kids 12 and Younger
Susan Ferriss | 11/27/2013 | Full Article
How Can Youth Service Providers Keep Sex Offenders Out?
James Swift | 11/25/2013 | Full Article