Resource Library
New to the Resource Library?
Learn how to navigate, search, and use our resources effectively.
Brief of Amici Curiae of 11 Addiction Experts in Support of Appellee
This brief argues against the brain disease model of addiction. It asserts that addiction is a set of behaviors responsive to consequences, not an involuntary condition like other brain diseases.
Amicus Curiae Brief of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, Inc., The Center for Public Representation, and Prisoners' Legal Services in Support of the Petitioner
This brief argues that courts should not jail individuals with substance use disorder for relapsing on probation. It asserts that requiring an addicted person to remain drug-free is unjust and violates precedent.
Brief for the Massachusetts Medical Society as Amicus Curiae, joined by AAAP, Association for Behavioral Healthcare, Grayken Center at BMC, MOAR, Mass. Society for Addiction Medicine, Northeastern Law’s Health Policy Center, and 28 others.
The brief argues that addiction is a chronic brain disease. Punishing relapse ignores medical consensus and hinders effective treatment, ultimately harming public health.
Brief Amicus Curiae of Professors of Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, and Constitutional Law in Support of Petitioner
This brief argues that courts must carefully consider a suspect's age, intelligence, and police tactics when deciding if a confession was voluntary. It claims lower courts ignored these factors, leading to a coerced confession.
Brief of Current and Former Prosecutors as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner
This brief argues that courts must carefully evaluate juvenile confessions, especially when a child has intellectual disabilities, because standard interrogation techniques can lead innocent children to falsely confess.
Brief of The Innocence Network as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner
This brief argues that police interrogation tactics can lead innocent people, especially juveniles, to falsely confess. It urges the Court to review cases where involuntary juvenile confessions led to wrongful convictions.
Brief of National Association for Public Defense and Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers as Amici Curiae in Support of Appellee
The brief argues the Eighth Amendment should ban capital punishment for 18-20 year olds. It contends that "evolving standards of decency" and developmental research show this age group is less culpable, similar to past exemptions.
Brief of Amici Curiae the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, et al. in Support of the Petition for Rehearing En Banc
This brief argues that sentencing juveniles to life without parole is unconstitutional unless they are deemed "irreparably corrupt." It states the prosecution must prove this to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
Brief of Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality as Amicus Curiae in Support of Raymond Williams
This brief argues that sentencing someone to life without parole for crimes committed as a juvenile is unconstitutional. It states that three-strikes laws should not count juvenile offenses.
Brief of Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality as Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner
This brief argues Washington courts must ensure juveniles sentenced as adults have a meaningful opportunity for release. It contends the state constitution bars life-equivalent sentences for juveniles.
Brief of Amicus Curiae NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. in Support of Petitioner
The brief argues a judge must find permanent incorrigibility before sentencing a child to life without parole. It claims the Mississippi Supreme Court failed to follow precedent, leading to arbitrary and racially biased sentencing risks.
Brief and Argument of Amicus Curiae in Support of Petitioner-Appellee
The brief argues that lengthy sentences without a chance for release are unconstitutional for minors. It claims Illinois should follow other states and overturn a 50-year sentence given to a 16-year-old.
Brief of Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner
This brief argues that courts must carefully consider a juvenile's age and development during police questioning. It asserts that prior rulings require special care for young people to ensure confessions are voluntary.
Brief of Amici Curiae Juvenile Law Center and Forty Other Organizations in Support of Petitioners
The brief argues that the Eighth Amendment's protection against excessive fines should apply to states. This would protect both adults and children in the justice system from disproportionate monetary penalties.
Brief of Amici Curiae Judges, Current and Former Prosecutors, Law Enforcement Officers, Juvenile Justice Officials, Correctional Officers, and Probation Officers in Support of Petitioner
The brief argues that juvenile offenders' sentences must account for their capacity for reform, as required by the Eighth Amendment. It contends that a very long sentence for a non-homicide juvenile offense violates prior rulings.