03 Oct What’s Next After Roper and Atkins?
The problem is the Court in Roper relied on the continued practice of punishing juveniles with this sentence as a justification for eliminating juvenile death penalty. “To the extent the juvenile death penalty might have residual deterrent effect, it is worth noting that the punishment of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is itself a severe sanction, in particular for a young person.” The possibility of life without parole for juveniles was a justification for the result in Roper. It will be difficult for Roper to now be a justification for the impossibility of life without parole.
More importantly, assuming a global consensus against the punishment of life without parole for juveniles, it will be exceedingly difficult to identify a national consensus in this country against the practice. The New York Times survey highlighted the strong trend toward this punishment, not away from it. According to the survey, approximately 4,000, or 3 percent of all 132,000 prisoners sentenced to life without parole, were juveniles when they began their sentence. It is doubtful that existing community standards in this country will support abolition of this practice. And Roper underscored that we only look to foreign opinion to confirm the centrality of rights within our own heritage.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.