Criteria and Procedures for Meaningful Parole Review for People Sentenced as Youth

This paper is part of the Series on Learning from Civil Rights Lawsuits from the Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse and focuses on parole review procedures for individuals serving long sentences for crimes committed under age 18, discusses constitutional dimensions of parole review for this group, and proposes model policies supporting a meaningful opportunities for release.  

From the Executive Summary: 

“In recent years, people serving life or other lengthy sentences for crimes committed under age 18 have fled lawsuits challenging parole processes and procedures that, they argue, fail to provide the requisite consideration of youth or realistic and meaningful opportunity for release. These lawsuits challenge decision-making criteria that fail to emphasize youth-related factors, or that focus on offense conduct to the exclusion of post-crime maturity and rehabilitation. They also challenge parole procedures that limit opportunities to correct the record or ensure accuracy, impede a meaningful showing of post-crime growth and change, or preclude judicial review. The results of these lawsuits have been mixed at best—some courts have rejected any efforts to apply the Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence in this context, and others have affirmed anemic parole processes under which few are ever released. But, in some states, these lawsuits have resulted in judicial decisions or settlement agreements that offer guidance on what parole should look like in this context. And elsewhere, litigation has complemented or catalyzed legislative reform efforts, resulting in new policies and procedures for parole review of this cohort. Building on the case law and legislative reforms, this white paper proposes model policies for robust constitutional compliance and meaningful, comprehensive parole review for people serving long sentences for crimes committed as youth.  

The paper proceeds as follows:  

Part I describes the changes in law in the late 1980s and early 1990s that resulted in a marked increase in young people sentenced to life or life-like sentences, as well as the evolving understanding of psychosocial and neurological development that followed.  

Part II summarizes the U.S. Supreme Court’s Eighth Amendment jurisprudence on this topic. 

Part III discusses the subsequent changes that states across the country have made to the ways that they sentence people for crimes committed under age 18, the ensuing rise in parole-eligible life and life-like sentences for that cohort, and the ways in which existing parole systems fell (and continue to fall) short.  

Part IV explores the constitutional dimensions of parole review in this context and the judicial decisions that have begun to fill in the contours of the relevant requirements.  

Finally, Part V offers model policies, with commentary, addressing the substantive and procedural components of parole review for people sentenced for crimes committed under age 18. The model policies aim to ensure a realistic and meaningful opportunity for release that is based on assessment of youth and post-crime maturity and rehabilitation, with procedures to support decision-makers in comprehensive and accurate parole review.”