numerous constitutional challenges to the FSMA. We begin with a discussion of pertinent case law and legislative enactments.
I. Juvenile Sentencing
A. Case Law
On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court handed down its decision in Miller v. Alabama and a companion case from Arkansas, Jackson v. Hobbs. Each case involved a fourteen-year-old offender convicted of murder and sentenced to mandatory life in prison without parole. Relying on its line of precedent holding that certain punishments are disproportionate when applied to juveniles,[1] the Court held that mandatory life without parole for juvenile offenders violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on "cruel and unusual punishments." Miller, 567 U.S. at 465. The Court explained that
[m]andatory life without parole for a juvenile precludes consideration of his chronological age and its hallmark features—among them, immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate risks and consequences. It prevents taking into account the family and home environment that surrounds him—and from which he cannot
- ↑ See, e.g., Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010) (holding that a sentence of life without parole violates the Eighth Amendment when imposed on juveniles in nonhomicide cases); Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005) (barring capital punishment for those under the age of eighteen at the time of their crimes). Roper and Graham established that "children are constitutionally different from adults for purposes of sentencing [b]ecause juveniles have diminished culpability and greater prospects for reform." Miller, 567 U.S. at 471.
3
