Having The Same Argument, Again.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch

I didn't say it had happened all at once. But the "national consensus" standard from Kennedy v. Louisiana now applies to the harshness of sentences other than death, which means that the seriousness with which crimes are punished is now a nationalized policy. If California wants to punish the bejeezus out of hate crimes, must they show that their sentences do not fall outside the "national consensus"?

Thanks for the link to Thompson, but as I'm sure you noticed, it doesn't define juvenile for purposes of constitutional law -- it just identifies a then-existing national consensus with regard to the DP, and that age was, if I read the case correctly, lower than 18 in many states. Can a state redefine juvenile as younger than 16 and give jury trial rights and impose all sentences other than DP or LWOP? Thompson doesn't say, but you'd better bet that all defense attorneys will be contending that all imposition of juvenile sentences in all but a few states is harsher than the national consensus, if only to preserve the issue for appeal.

I see. You wanted constitutional jurisprudence that would fit on a bumper sticker.