Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
Brief of Faith Leaders in Philadelphia and Beyond as Amici Curiae in Support of Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff Safehouse
This brief argues that blocking Safehouse's overdose prevention site burdens the religious freedom of its board members. Their faith traditions command saving lives and providing care, which Safehouse aims to do.
Brief of 21 Amici Curiae Groups Interested in Domestic Violence Issues and Women's and Immigrants' Rights, In Support of Petitioner
The brief argues a domestic violence survivor should receive immigration relief. It claims her past crime should be re-evaluated considering her mental state and coercion, and that she faces a high risk of torture if returned to Mexico.
Brief of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amicus Curiae in Support of Appellant and Reversal
The brief argues that capital defense lawyers must fully investigate all potential mitigating evidence, including childhood abuse. It contends Gary Terry's lawyers failed this duty, not presenting readily available evidence of his abuse.
Brief of the Committee for Public Counsel Services and the Health in Justice Action Lab at Northeastern University of Law joined by Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
This brief argues that Jesse Carrillo’s convictions for drug distribution and involuntary manslaughter should be overturned. It asserts his actions were not reckless and that he should have been charged with simple drug possession instead.
Brief of Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners
This brief argues that individuals serving life without parole for crimes committed between 18 and 21 years old should have their sentences reconsidered.
Brief of Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality, American Civil Liberties Union of Washington, Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and Washington Defender Association as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent
This brief argues that courts should set minimum sentences for juveniles at the statutory minimum unless proven incorrigible. It contends that identifying an "irreparably corrupt" youth is too difficult and risks unfairly long sentences.
Brief of Amici Curiae Justice for All Alliance in Support of Petitioner
This brief argues that executing murderers under 18 is not cruel and unusual punishment. It contends that the Court should assess each juvenile's moral culpability individually, rather than grouping them by age.
Memorandum of Amicus Curiae Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality in Support of Petition for Review
This brief argues a 17-year-old was wrongly sentenced as an adult without considering his youth. It claims the state should prove a child's adult-level culpability, not require the child to prove diminished responsibility.
Brief of Former WV Delegate John Ellem, Former HI Rep. Karen Awana, HI Rep. John Mizuno, NV Assemblyman John Hambrick, VT Rep. Barbara Rachelson, UT Rep. V. Lowry Snow, AR Sen. Missy Irvin, and AR Sen. Greg Leding as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent
The brief argues that Miller and Montgomery apply to all juvenile life without parole sentences, not just mandatory ones. Most states have already adopted this view in their laws or court rulings.
Brief Amici Curiae of Erwin Chemerinsky, Aziz Huq, Leah Litman, David Strauss, Carlos Vázquez, and Larry Yackle in Support of Respondent
Lee Malvo argues his life without parole sentence as a juvenile is unconstitutional. He claims current law requires considering a juvenile's youth and only allows such sentences for the rarest, irreparably corrupt offenders.
Brief of Scholars of Criminal Law as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner
This brief argues that sentencing a juvenile to life without parole is unconstitutional without a finding of permanent incorrigibility. It contends that evidence of a child's rehabilitation should prevent such a sentence.
Brief for the United States as Amicus Curiae Supporting Petitioner
This brief argues that past Supreme Court decisions do not allow retroactively invalidating discretionary life-without-parole sentences for juveniles. It asserts that prior rulings only applied to mandatory, not discretionary, sentences.
Amicus Curiae Brief of Maryland Crime Victims' Resource Center, Inc., in Support of Petitioner
The brief argues that courts must consider victims' interests, not just defendants', when applying sentencing laws. It asserts that requiring specific findings for juvenile life sentences creates undue harm for victims.
Brief of Amici Curiae Current and Former Prosecutors, Department of Justice Officials, and Judges in Support of Respondent
The brief argues that sentencing children to life without parole is unconstitutional, as juvenile crimes often reflect temporary immaturity. It contends this rule applies to all juvenile offenders, regardless of how they were sentenced.
Brief of Amici Curiae Current and Former Prosecutors, Department of Justice Officials, and Judges in Support of Respondent
This brief argues that sentences for juvenile offenders must consider their age and maturity, regardless of sentencing scheme. It asserts that life without parole is unconstitutional for most children, reflecting transient immaturity.