Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
Brief of Amicus Curiae the American Psychological Association in Support of Petitioner John Floyd
This brief argues that even "voluntary" confessions do not always prove guilt. It highlights scientific evidence showing false confessions can occur due to interrogation methods or a defendant's psychological traits.
Merit Brief of Amici Curiae American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Foundation, Inc., Juvenile Law Center, Montgomery County Public Defender, and Children's Law Center, Inc. et al. in Support of Appellant
Ohio's Adam Walsh Act gives juvenile courts discretion to classify juvenile sex offenders. Only a juvenile court can reclassify an offender after a hearing, allowing the court to prioritize rehabilitation.
Brief of Juvenile Law Center; The Loyola Civitas ChildLaw Center; The Children and Family Justice Center; The Youth Law Center; and The National Juvenile Defender Center as Amici Curiae in Support of the Respondent-Appellant
The brief argues that youth in delinquency cases have a constitutional right to a zealous defense lawyer, not a guardian representing their best interests.
Brief of Amici Curiae TeamChild, Commitee for Indigent Representation and Civil Legal Equality, and Children and Family Justice Center
The brief argues that due process requires legal representation for children in truancy cases. Without counsel, children are denied a fair hearing and their right to education is jeopardized.
Brief of the American Medical Association and the American Medical Association and the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry in Support of Neither Party
This brief argues that adolescent brains are still developing, making them more prone to impulsive and risky behavior. It suggests these scientific differences are relevant to legal discussions about culpability.
Brief of Council of Juvenile Correctional Administrators, et al.
This brief argues that juveniles should not receive life sentences without parole. It contends that a person's true character and potential for rehabilitation cannot be assessed until after adolescence.
Brief of Disability Rights Legal Center as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioners
Sending children to prison for life without parole is cruel and unusual. It violates the Eighth Amendment due to juveniles' lower culpability, potential for rehabilitation, and frequent disabilities.
Brief of Amici Curiae Educators in Support of Petitioners
This brief argues that sentencing adolescents to life without parole for non-homicide crimes is cruel and unusual. It contends that adolescents have a capacity for growth and rehabilitation that such sentences ignore.
Brief of Former Juvenile Offenders as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners
The brief argues that sentencing juveniles to life without parole is unconstitutional. It states youth characteristics make them more capable of rehabilitation and less deserving of retribution, like death sentences.
Brief of Amici Curiae of the Mothers Against Murderers Association, Robert Hoelscher, Ruth Johnson, Azim Khamisa, Bill Pelke, Aqeela Sherrills, Tammi Smith, and Linda White in Support of Petitioners
This brief argues that sentencing juveniles to life without parole for crimes less severe than murder violates the Eighth Amendment. It contends that proportionality, rehabilitation, and forgiveness should guide juvenile sentencing.
Brief for the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc., Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race & Justice, and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioners
This brief argues that children are less culpable than adults due to their unique characteristics. It contends that juvenile life without parole sentences violate the Eighth Amendment and lead to unreliable outcomes.
Brief Amici Curiae of National Organization of Victims of Juvenile Lifers in Support of Respondent
This brief argues that juveniles who commit violent crimes should be eligible for life without parole sentences. It contends that the Eighth Amendment does not forbid such sentences, which are supported by national consensus.
Brief Amicus Curiae of Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence in Support of Respondents
This brief argues that the scientific evidence presented is not yet reliable enough for court use. It asserts that courts should not overturn legislative policy choices based on developing scientific theories.
Brief Amicus Curiae of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation in Support of Respondents
The brief argues the state court decision rests on independent state grounds. A clearly correct federal premise is insufficient for Supreme Court jurisdiction to review a different federal question.
Brief for the States of Louisiana, et Al., as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent
This brief argues states should retain power to sentence violent juvenile offenders to life without parole.