Amicus Curiae Brief of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. in Support of Defendant-appellants Raymond Curtis Carp, Dakotah Wolfgang Eliason, and Cortez Roland Davis
Mitra Jafary-Hariri
Sherrilyn Ifill
Christina Swarns
Jin Hee Lee
Vincent M. Southerland
SummaryOriginal

Summary

The racialized superpredator myth drove the enactment of harsh juvenile sentencing laws, exacerbating racial disparities. In Michigan, these discriminatory laws render life without parole sentences unjust for all children.

2014 | State Juristiction

Amicus Curiae Brief of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. in Support of Defendant-appellants Raymond Curtis Carp, Dakotah Wolfgang Eliason, and Cortez Roland Davis

Keywords superpredator myth; racial disparities; juveniles; youth violence; racial disparities; LWOP; life without parole; racialized criminalization of youth; juvenile sentencing laws
Screenshot 2024-05-18 at 9.01.42 PM

Summary of Argument

In a series of recent decisions, the United States Supreme Court firmly established thatchildren are less culpable than adults and that youth have distinctive attributes, which should be considered when imposing a punishment as severe as life without parole. Thus, in Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), the Supreme Court barred juvenile life without parole sentences for nonhomicide offenses. Two years later, the Supreme Court, in Miller v. Alabama and Jackson v. Hobbs (Miller/Jackson), 132 S. Ct. 2455, 2463 (2012), prohibited mandatory life without parolesentences for children. At the heart of these landmark decisions is the Eighth Amendment principle of "proportionate punishment" and the recognition that children have diminished culpability by virtue of their child status.

The evaluation of a child's culpability has, however, been marred by racial stereotypes and underlying fears of youth violence. From the late-1980s through the mid-1990s, the "super- predator myth" crystallized unfounded perceptions of youth of color as uniquely depraved and violent, beyond rehabilitation or redemption. Despite the fallacy of these stereotypes, theresultant fear of so-called "super-predators" fueled the passage of extreme juvenile sentencing laws that ignored the unique characteristics of youth and, instead, drove children into the adult criminal justice system to face outsized adult punishments.

Michigan was a national leader in the implementation of extreme, adult sentences for children. In 1988, Michigan legislators created automatic waiver provisions that required 15- and 16-year-old children to be tried as adults for certain serious offenses if the prosecutor filed charges in adult court. Upon conviction, these children could receive either an adult or juvenilesentence. Michigan expanded this automatic waiver in 1996 to include 14-year-old children, and also mandated adult sentencing for children tried and convicted as adults for certain serious offenses such as first degree murder. The confluence of these changes in the law, in conjunction with mandatory life without parole sentencing for children convicted of first degree murder, ultimately led Michigan to have the second highest population of juvenile lifers in the country. Given the influence of the racially-charged super-predator myth on these extreme sentencing laws, it is not surprising that Michigan's juvenile sentencing scheme has a disproportionate effect on children of color: while youth of color comprise only 29% of Michigan's children, they are a shocking 73% of Michigan's children serving life without parole.

In light of the fallacies surrounding the super-predator myth that informed Michigan's current juvenile sentencing laws, the most severe sentence available in Michigan—life without parole—should never be imposed on any child, regardless of the offense or the date of conviction and sentence. Accordingly, amicus curiae urges this Court to grant the relief requested by Defendant-Appellants Raymond Curtis Carp, Dakotah Wolfgang Eliason, and Cortez Roland Davis.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Summary of Argument

Recent Supreme Court decisions (e.g., Graham v. Florida and Miller/Jackson) have recognized the diminished culpability of children and prohibited life without parole sentences for nonhomicide offenses and mandatory life without parole sentences for juveniles. These decisions are grounded in the Eighth Amendment's principle of proportionate punishment.

Diminished Culpability and Racial Bias

The evaluation of juvenile culpability has been influenced by racial stereotypes and the unfounded "super-predator myth" of the 1980s and 1990s, which portrayed youth of color as inherently violent and irredeemable. This myth fueled the passage of extreme juvenile sentencing laws that disproportionately impacted children of color.

Michigan's Juvenile Sentencing Laws

Michigan implemented automatic waiver provisions in 1988 and 1996, allowing children as young as 14 to be tried as adults and receive adult sentences, including life without parole. This has resulted in Michigan having a disproportionately high number of juvenile lifers of color.

Conclusion

The super-predator myth has had a devastating impact on juvenile sentencing, leading to the imposition of extreme sentences on children of color. In light of the Supreme Court's recognition of diminished juvenile culpability, life without parole sentences should be abolished for all children in Michigan, regardless of their offense or conviction date.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Summary of Argument

In recent years, the Supreme Court has recognized that children are different from adults and should be treated differently in the justice system. In Graham v. Florida and Miller/Jackson, the Court ruled that life without parole sentences for children are unconstitutional in most cases.

The Problem of Racial Bias

However, racial stereotypes have played a significant role in shaping juvenile sentencing laws. In the 1990s, the "super-predator myth" portrayed youth of color as violent and beyond redemption. This myth led to harsh laws that pushed children into the adult criminal justice system, where they faced severe punishments.

Michigan's Extreme Sentencing Laws

Michigan was one of the states that implemented these extreme laws. In 1988, the state created automatic waiver provisions that allowed children as young as 14 to be tried as adults for serious offenses. If convicted, these children could receive adult sentences, including life without parole.

As a result, Michigan has the second-highest population of juvenile lifers in the country. Disproportionately, 73% of these children are of color, even though they make up only 29% of the state's youth population.

The Need for Change

The Supreme Court's recent rulings and the evidence of racial bias in juvenile sentencing laws make it clear that life without parole sentences should never be imposed on children. These sentences are disproportionate and fail to recognize the unique characteristics and potential for rehabilitation of young people.

Therefore, it is essential to reconsider Michigan's extreme juvenile sentencing laws and ensure that all children are treated fairly and given a chance to succeed.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Summary of Argument

The Problem:

In the past, people believed that some kids were "super-predators," meaning they were so violent and dangerous that they couldn't be helped. This idea was based on stereotypes and fear, and it led to really harsh laws that treated kids like adults.

Michigan was one of the states that passed these laws. They made it so that kids as young as 14 could be tried as adults and sentenced to life in prison without the chance of parole (getting out early). This has led to a lot of kids of color being locked up for life, even though they're less responsible for their actions than adults.

The Solution:

The Supreme Court has said that kids are different from adults and should be treated differently. They've ruled that it's unconstitutional to sentence kids to life without parole for crimes other than murder, and that even for murder, judges should consider the kid's age and other factors before giving them such a harsh sentence.

Why This Matters:

It's not fair to lock kids up for life without giving them a chance to change and grow. Kids make mistakes, and they deserve a second chance. The laws in Michigan that allow for life sentences for kids are based on outdated and harmful ideas. We need to change these laws so that kids are treated fairly and have a chance at a better future.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Summary of Argument

Some laws say that kids who do very bad things should be punished like adults. But kids are different from adults, and they should not get the same punishments.

Kids are still learning and growing. They don't always understand the things they do. They are also more likely to change and become better people.

In the past, some people had a wrong idea that some kids of color were very violent and could not be helped. This led to laws that punished kids too harshly.

Michigan had laws that made kids as young as 14 be tried as adults. If they were found guilty, they could be sentenced to life in prison without ever getting out. This happened to a lot of kids of color.

We know now that the idea about kids of color being violent was wrong. We also know that kids are different from adults and should not be punished as harshly. That's why we should never sentence kids to life in prison, no matter what they did.

Open Amicus Brief as PDF

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

Brief of the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc. as Amici Curiae in Support of Defendant-Appellants Raymond Curtis Carp, Dakotah Wolfgang Eliason, and Cortez Roland Davis, People v. Carp, People v. Eliason, People v. Davis, Nos. 146478, 147428, 146819 (Mich. Feb. 20, 2014).

    Highlights