It was busy day in the highest court in the land as the Supreme Court ruled on juvenile sentencing and the incarceration of sex offenders
Sentencing some juvenile criminals to life in prison without parole is “cruel and unusual” punishment, especially when their crime is not murder, the Supreme Court ruled Monday.
The justices by a 6-3 vote found such a sentence for a 16-year-old armed robber from Florida was unconstitutional. The court concluded life without parole is not justified for those offenders who may lack full “culpability” for their actions, because of their ages.
The Supreme Court ruled Monday the federal government has the power to indefinitely keep some sex offenders behind bars after they have served their sentences, if officials determine those inmates may prove “sexually dangerous” in the future.
“The federal government, as custodian of its prisoners, has the constitutional power to act in order to protect nearby (and other) communities from the danger such prisoners may pose,” Justice Stephen Breyer wrote for the 7-2 majority.
At issue was the constitutionality of federal “civil commitment” for sex offenders who are nearing the end of their confinement or who are considered too mentally incompetent to stand trial.
The main plaintiff in the case, Graydon Comstock, was certified as dangerous just six days before his 37-month federal prison term for processing child pornography was to end. He and the others filing suit remain confined at Butner Federal Correctional Complex near Raleigh, North Carolina.