Tag: juvenile justice
U.S. Supreme Court Justice's Sonia Sotomayor, left, and Brett Kavanaugh

In Stunning Rebuke To Kavanaugh,  Sotomayor Warns Of Radical Trump Court

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor delivered a strong warning to the American people and a strong rebuke of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the newest far right wing Justices on the Trump-shaped conservative-majority Supreme Court in a blistering but brilliant dissent handed down Thursday.

Justice Sotomayor warned this newly-constructed court, unevenly weighted with six justices (ranging from highly conservative to far right wing religious extremist,) is "willing to overrule precedent without even acknowledging it is doing so, much less providing any special justification."

That warning is similar to those posed by legal experts from the left who were extremely opposed to then-President Donald Trump's final Supreme Court nominee, Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Barrett's judicial opinions made clear she will not honor precedent, known as stare decisis. Without that legal guardrail many decidedly settled law targets of conservatives, from the right to choose an abortion to the right to marry, could be struck down by the "Trump Court."

The case Justice Sotomayor used to deliver her warning and her criticism of Justice Kavanaugh, is Jones v. Mississippi. It centers on a 15-year old boy who murdered his father, claimed self defense, and was sentenced to life in prison. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled life in prison for minors convicted of "non-homicide crimes" constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, unless that minor has been found to be "incorrigible," or unable to be rehabilitated. (The ACLU's position is regardless of the type of crime, life in prison for minors is cruel and unusual.)

On Thursday Justice Kavanaugh, who himself has a history of disturbing acts in college, as his confirmation hearing proved, wrote the 6-3 majority opinion in which he upheld the lower court ruling that the defendant was rightly sentenced to life in prison despite no finding of whether or not he is able to be rehabilitated.

"How low this Court's respect for stare decisis has sunk," Justice Sotomayor warned.

"Not long ago, that doctrine was recognized as a pillar of the 'rule of law,' critical to 'keep the scale of justice even and steady, and not liable to waver with every new judge's opinion,'" she wrote, citing Kavanaugh's own opinion in a previous ruling.

"Now, it seems, the Court is willing to overrule precedent without even acknowledging it is doing so, much less providing any special justification. It is hard to see how that approach is 'founded in the law rather than in the proclivities of individuals,'" she added, again using Kavanaugh's own words against him.

She called the ruling a "contortion" of previous rulings, and writes: "As this Court has consistently reiterated, 'a departure from precedent demands special justification.'"

"The Court offers no such justification today. Nor could it," she charged.

"Instead of addressing these factors, the Court simply rewrites Miller and Montgomery," she observes, naming the two cases the provide the precedent today's ruling effectively overrules, "to say what the Court now wishes they had said, and then denies that it has done any such thing."

Slate's legal expert Mark Joseph Stern calls the ruling in the case "barbarous," Sotomayor's warning "ominous," and her criticism of Kavanaugh "one of the most savage passages she has ever written."

University of Michigan Law School asst. professor Leah Litman:


The U.S. Supreme Court has now made emphatically clear it is an activist court and "settled law" is fair game.

Civil rights activists, and the American people who value their rights, consider yourselves warned.

Indian Court Rejects More Jail Time For Man Convicted As A Minor In 2012 Gang Rape

Indian Court Rejects More Jail Time For Man Convicted As A Minor In 2012 Gang Rape

By Shashank Bengali and Parth M.N., Los Angeles Times (TNS)

MUMBAI, India — A day after a man convicted as a minor in a brutal 2012 gang rape and murder in New Delhi was released from detention, India’s Supreme Court on Monday rejected appeals to extend his sentence in a case that has sparked a passionate debate over juvenile justice.

The man, who was shy of his 18th birthday when convicted, was released Sunday after completing a three-year term in a reform home, the maximum sentence allowed under Indian law.

On Monday, India’s highest court dismissed a petition filed by the Delhi Commission of Women, a government body, arguing that the man should be returned to custody. The court ruled that despite the emotions surrounding the case, which prompted international outrage and reforms that have expedited prosecutions of rape cases, it had no legal grounds to extend the man’s sentence.

“We cannot interpret the law to curtail his freedom without legislative sanction,” Justice U.U. Lalit said. “We share your concern, but we cannot go beyond the statute.”

The man, now 20, was the sole juvenile among six assailants convicted of the rape of a physiotherapy student aboard a moving bus in India’s capital in December 2012. The victim died from her injuries two days later. The other five perpetrators were sentenced to death.

The man who was convicted as a minor was released into the care of a nongovernmental aid agency because of fears that he would not be safe if he returned to his home. As part of his state-sanctioned rehabilitation, he is to receive about $150 and a sewing machine to set up a tailoring shop.

His release sparked protests in New Delhi on Sunday, with activists and some government officials calling for changes to India’s Juvenile Justice Act that would allow 16-year-olds to be tried as adults in serious crimes.

“Crime has won, we have lost,” the victim’s mother, Asha Devi, told reporters Monday. “The women of this country have always been betrayed and this has happened once again. Nobody is concerned about women’s safety.”

The outcry, which was fanned by nonstop coverage by India’s voluble television news channels, prompted lawmakers to schedule arguments on the Juvenile Justice Act for Tuesday, but that also drew scorn from some quarters. Lawyers called it a knee-jerk reaction by politicians aimed at appeasing the media, arguing there was little evidence to suggest that lowering the age of majority would deter such crimes.

“Please do not rush into stupidity due to vocal anchors,” tweeted Sanjay Hegde, a senior lawyer who argues before the Supreme Court.

“India’s rape problems are complex and can’t be solved by quick-fix harsh laws.”

The 2012 case triggered some changes to Indian laws aimed at improving protection of women, including the creation of fast-track courts to handle rape cases and harsher punishment for sexual harassment, stalking and other offenses.

Yet incidents of rape and sexual crimes cases continue far from the spotlight of major cities. Activists also point to comments by some elected officials who have suggested that victims provoke sexual crimes due to the way they dress or behave.

“Our young boys do not learn that rape is morally wrong and a crime followed surely by punishment,” said Kavita Krishnan, an activist. “Instead they learn that some rapists are animals who deserve to be punished, while most rape complainants are liars and most responsibility to prevent rape lies with women not with men.

“As long as our system and our society teaches these lessons, we cannot deter rape and sexual harassment.”

(Parth M.N. is a special correspondent.)

©2015 Los Angeles Times. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Photo: Demonstrators listen to a speaker during a protest against the release of a juvenile rape convict, in New Delhi, India, December 20, 2015. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi