One might think that recent Supreme Court rulings restricting life without parole (LWOP) sentences for juveniles would provide a stronger spark for states to alter some of their sentencing practices. But, as is highlighted in a recent New York Times editorial, it appears that it will take more than a Supreme Court ruling to alter how some view justice.

Despite Supreme Court cases such as Miller v. Alabama, where it struck down mandatory life without parole statutes for a juvenile (even in the case of homicide), states are finding ways to effectively come up with the very long sentences.  For example, in North Carolina the legislature exchanged mandatory life for a minimum 25-year sentence for 15 – 17 year olds convicted of murder.  And cases in Florida that were impacted by the earlier Graham decision are still working their way through new sentencing processes.

The Supreme Court has a hopeful outlook regarding youth’s capacity for redemption. Justice Kagan pointed to neuroscience, brain development and psychology to support the position that juveniles certainly have a heightened capacity for change. Juveniles given the option of treatment and rehabilitation in a setting with others their age are less likely to commit future crimes compared to youth placed in correctional facilities with adults receiving no treatment.

Hopefully states will strive to reach higher, toward the bar that has been set by the Supreme Court, and shift their primary focus from cruel and unusual punishment to rehabilitation!

By: Katey Collins