From [HERE] A wave of reforms since 2010 has changed the trajectory of punishment for young people by substantially limiting the use of juvenile life without parole (JLWOP) sentences. At the sentence’s height of prominence in 2012, more than 2,900 people were serving JLWOP, which provided no avenue for review or release.1 Since reforms began, most sentence recipients have at least been afforded a meaningful opportunity for a parole or sentence review. More than 1,000 have come home.2

This progress is remarkable, yet thousands more who have been sentenced to similarly extreme punishments as youth have not been awarded the same opportunity. Our analysis shows that in 2020, prisons held over 8,600 people sentenced for crimes committed when they were under 18 who were serving either life with the possibility of parole (LWP) or “virtual” life sentences of 50 years or longer. This brief argues for extending the sentencing relief available in JLWOP cases to those serving other forms of life imprisonment for crimes committed in their youth.

In addition, The Sentencing Project has estimated that nearly two in five people sentenced to life without parole (LWOP) were 25 or younger at the time of their crime.3 These emerging adults, too, deserve a meaningful opportunity for a second look because their developmental similarities with younger people reduces their culpability in criminal conduct. The evidence provided in this brief supports bold reforms for youth and emerging adults sentenced to extreme punishments.

Supreme Court of the United States Authorizes Second Looks for Young People

A series of landmark U.S. Supreme Court cases beginning in 2010 acknowledged that children under 18 must be viewed as less culpable for criminal conduct compared to adults because they have not yet fully developed. Their reduced culpability stems from the increase in risk-taking and impulsivity during this period of brain development, particularly in emotionally charged situations.4 Beginning with Graham v. Florida in 2010,5the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that individuals under 18 could not receive LWOP in non-homicide crimes. This ruling affected the sentences of less than 200 people,6 but the implications of the ruling set precedence for future cases that elicited the resentencing and subsequent release of many more.7

In 2012, the Court ruled in Miller v. Alabama that individuals under 18 could not be sentenced to LWOP in states that uphold a mandatory LWOP statute for homicide convictions because there could be no guarantee that young age and its attending characteristics had been accounted for.8 The Miller ruling had much broader implications than the Graham ruling. Research conducted by The Sentencing Project confirmed that prior to Miller, the majority of JLWOP sentences were imposed in states where judges did not have another choice.9 This ruling was not explicitly retroactive, however. In 2016 in Montgomery v. Louisiana,((Montgomery v. Louisiana, 577 U.S. 190 (2016). https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/577/190/)) the Court affirmed that the Miller ruling applied retroactively, affecting over 2,000 individuals previously sentenced to JLWOP.10 A 2024 study led by researchers at the University of California Los Angeles, found that 87% of the JLWOP population has been resentenced following the rulings in Miller and Montgomery. As of January 2024, 1,070 individuals have been released.11 [MORE]