Detailed review of “How States Are Rethinking Life Without Parole For Youth”

The quoted portion of the title of this post is the headline of this effective Law360 piece reviewing an array of recent state law developments regarding LWOP punishments for younger offenders.  I recommend the lengthy piece in full, and here are just a few snippets:

According to The Sentencing Project, nearly 200,000 people are serving life sentences — including those with parole and so-called virtual life terms that all but ensure they will die in prison. Over 68,000 of them — 35% — were under 25 at the time of sentencing, and nearly 20,000 are serving LWOP….

In recent years, a new front has emerged in the fight against extreme youth sentencing — state courts.  This shift has been driven by advances in neuroscience, advocacy efforts, and the voices of incarcerated people themselves, challenging assumptions about the legal culpability of young adults. 

Michigan has been at the center of that shift as one of a handful of states that, in recent years, has expanded the reach of the Miller decision through state court rulings.  On April 10, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled in two consolidated cases, People v. Taylor and People v. Czarnecki, holding that 19- and 20-year-olds cannot be subject to mandatory life sentences under the state constitution.  Rather, they are entitled to be sentenced as individuals, based on the unique factors of their situation – where they can argue for sentences of years instead of life….

Three states have so far banned mandatory life without parole sentences for individuals under 21. Washington did so in March 2021 with a ruling by its top court.  The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court went further, entirely banning LWOP sentences for this age group by deciding Commonwealth v. Mattis in January 2024….

State constitutions in Michigan and Massachusetts prohibit punishments that are “cruel or unusual,” rather than the narrower “cruel and unusual” language in the Eighth Amendment. The Pennsylvania and Washington constitutions bar “cruel” punishment.  Those differences offer wider legal grounds for challenges in state courts than at the federal level….

Some prosecutors, victims’ advocate groups and legal scholars have opposed the expansion of the Miller decision’s reach from the time the U.S. Supreme Court decided that seminal case in 2012. Concerns about banning mandatory LWOP sentences have centered on public safety, recidivism and the rights of victims’ families….

In Michigan, even before the state high court decided the Parks and Taylor cases, the Prosecuting Attorneys Association of Michigan, or PAAM, had expressed opposition to legislative proposals that would have outright banned LWOP sentences for defendants who were 19 and younger at the time of their crimes. J. Dee Brooks, the president of PAAM and the elected prosecutor of Midland County, Michigan, told Law360 that he disagrees with the Michigan Supreme Court’s analysis in the Taylor ruling, saying the way it considered brain science creates a “gross overgeneralization.”