Citation

Levick M. Juv. Fam. Court J. 2019; 70(3): 25-44.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1111/jfcj.12144

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In a series of decisions issued between 2005-2016, the United States Supreme Court relied on emerging scientific research detailing the developmental differences between children and adults to revamp its juvenile sentencing jurisprudence under the Eighth Amendment. The research established that youth's developmental immaturity reduces their culpability for their criminal conduct, while also demonstrating their heightened capacity for change and rehabilitation. The Court focused on the most extreme sentences for youth, banning the imposition of the death penalty on youth under the age of eighteen in Roper v. Simmons (2005), and severely limiting the availability of life without parole sentences even for youth convicted of murder, in Graham v Florida (2010) and Miller v Alabama (2012). This article traces the Court's evolution in reviewing sentences for youth in our justice system, and considers how the Court's reasoning in these cases may influence further reforms in the justice system's treatment of youth looking ahead.

Keywords: Juvenile justice

Language: en

Keywords

Adolescent development; Juvenile death penalty; Juvenile justice; Juvenile life without parole; Kids are different; Youth and cruel and unusual punishment; Youth in the adult system; Youth under the Constitution; Youth under the Eighth Amendment