This presentation was a part of the Social Justice Internship program. It covers the background and detriments of sentencing juveniles to life without parole.

1. Juvenile Life Sentences Without
Opportunity for Parole
(JLWOP)
Tim Platten

2. “There are two lasting bequeaths we can give our
children. One is roots. The other is wings.” -Krinsky

3. What exactly is a JLWOP?
• A juvenile is considered anyone under the age of 18 in the court of
law.
• It is possible to be tried as an adult when under the age of 18, but that is not
what happens in JLWOP.
• In these cases, they are being tried as juveniles and given the
sentences of adults.
• Life vs life without opportunity for parole
• JLWOP sentencing is an effort by the U.S. judicial system to remove
“future criminals” off the streets forever by stigmatizing them as
hardened criminals for the crimes they committed when they are
actually immature, uneducated, and often mentally ill juveniles.

4. What is the Historical Context of JLWOP
Usage?
• The roots of this practice are founded in the 1990’s belief that violent,
mostly black, juveniles are “super-predators” that cannot be
rehabilitated under any circumstance whatsoever.
• An important thing to understand about this issue is that it was a
unified movement across parties in our country. Even the past DNC
presidential candidate was quoted saying, “no conscience, no
empathy, we can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we
have to bring them to heel.” in the 90’s.
• The term itself is long-since gone, but the aftermath of the movement
can still be felt in our prison system and in the racial tensions of
society today.

5. Who are JLWOPs affecting?
• A study done at UCLA showed that, “people were more afraid, and more
likely to support harsher punishments for youth, when exposed to a mug
shot of an African-American or Hispanic youth offender for just five
seconds.”
• As of 2010, 2,500 children were sentenced to LWOP. This averages out to
79 years spent in prison for a mistake made in the first 18 years.
• African-American youth are sentenced to LWOP at a rate 10 times greater
than white youth.
• In the state of California alone, 158 of 180 people serving JLWOP sentences are
people of color.
• Lastly, according to youthlaw.org, 59% of those serving JLWOP sentences
were first-time offenders and had no criminal record.

6. “How is it that the country that holds itself out as
a beacon of light to the rest of the world, a
country that portrays itself as a champion of
human rights, treats its most vulnerable citizens in
a way that most of the world frowns upon?” – Tera
Agyepong

7. Court Cases of Change
• Roper V. Simmons (2005)
• Banned the death penalty for juveniles.
• Important to realize that the sentencing to death happened when they were juveniles
and they would sit in prison for years before actually facing execution
• Supreme Court wrote that, “the death penalty is a disproportionate
punishment for the young; immaturity diminishes their culpability, as does
their susceptibility to outside pressures and influences.”
• This stance would be cited under the 8th amendment of the U.S. constitution which
would open the door for major cases to come about sentencing juveniles to prison.
• This ruling would save the lives of 76 people awaiting their executions for
crimes they committed under the age of 18.
• Between 1976 and 2005, 22 defendants had been executed.
• This ruling would leave the most extreme sentence for juveniles as JLWOP.

8. Court Cases of Change
• Graham v. Florida (2010)
• The first case to build off the precedent set in Roper v. Simmons
• Banned the use of JLWOP for anything but homicide-offenses.
• The language used defined a homicide offense as participating in anything that resulted
in homicide, i.e. if you were robbing a man with another person and the other person
shot them.
• The court’s reasoning was that the cruelest punishment available should be
limited to the cruelest of crimes and that if that is not how it works then it
violates the 8th amendment

9. Court Cases of Change
• Jackson V Hobbs (2012)
• Building off both prior cases, judges of Jackson v Hobbs claimed that it is
required of the court to look at context when deciding to sentence JLWOP.
• This effectively banned mandatory sentencing to JLWOPs.
• Judge’s opinion mirrored that of Roper v Simmons on the treatment of
juveniles.
• Prior to this, 28 states had mandatory JLWOP sentencing.
• Montgomery v. Louisiana (2016)
• In response to the ruling of Jackson v Hobbs in 2012, 7 states passed
legislation stating that its decision did not apply retroactively.
• This court case solidified the fact that Jackson v Hobbs was in fact retroactive.
• Because of this case, 2,500 defendants were given the opportunity for parole.

10. What now?
• A lot of progress in this fight has been made in the courts, but it is
also to advocate in the social realm for ideologies like
“superpredators” to change, as they still are prevalent in our society.
• You can write your senators & representatives as JLWOP sentences
can still happen.
• Lastly, It is important to realized that even if life without opportunity
for parole is banned, defendants can still never see parole for crimes
they committed as juveniles.

11. Sources:
• http://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/juvenile-life-without-
parole/
• http://fairpunishment.org/the-superpredator-myth-and-the-rise-of-jwlop/
• https://youthlaw.org/publication/locked-away-forever-the-case-against-
juvenile-life-without-parole/
• https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/10-9647
• "Disrupting The Pathway From Foster Care To The Justice System—A
Former Prosecutor's Perspectives On Reform.“
• "Children Left behind Bars: Sullivan, Graham, and Juvenile Life without
Parole Sentences."