Legal Docket

Use the filters on the left to browse our legal docket.  For more information on race equity arguments, use this tool.

Date
11 - 20 of 449 resultsReset
Juvenile Life Without Parole (JLWOP)

Baggett v. Bean

Nevada District Courts •
We challenged the constitutionality of imposing mandatory life without parole on a 19-year-old. Our brief argued that based on the text and the history of Section 6 and Nevada’s general history of protecting individual rights, Nevada’s protections against cruel or unusual punishments is broader than the Eighth Amendment of the Federal Constitution.
Economic Justice

United States v. Myers

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit •
The amicus brief explains how garnishing funds from small deposits made to inmates accounts by loved ones imposes unnecessary, and wide-reaching, harms on incarcerated people and their families, prohibits rehabilitation, and creates more unsafe prison conditions.
Extended Foster Care

S.L. v. Swanson

Michigan Court of Appeals •
Our brief highlighted the unique and devastating harms that youth in the foster system suffer when they are banned from visiting their incarcerated parents in person, including the perspectives of Juvenile Law Center’s youth advocates with experience navigating these harms. Our brief further argued that in-person visits with incarcerated parents are critical to the wellbeing of children in the foster system, especially because visitation is crucial to the goal of family reunification. Finally, we discussed the ways in which Genesee County Jail’s ban on in-person family visits entrenches racial and economic disparities. Our brief details the foster system’s disproportionate separation of Black, Latine, and Indigenous families.
Economic Justice

In re Torres on H.C.

California Supreme Court •
Our brief focused on the impact of pretrial detention on parents and their children. We explained how charging parents unaffordable bail can lead to the state placing their children in the foster system and can even lead to permanent termination of parental rights. We focused on the harms of foster system involvement and the disparate impacts of unaffordable money bail on California’s Black, Latine and Indigenous children and children in poverty due to the deep racial and economic disparities in both the foster care and carceral systems.
Youth Interrogations & Access to Counsel

In re K.R.C.

Wisconsin Supreme Court •
Our brief emphasized that when determining whether an individual is in custody, courts must assess every custody factor from a reasonable child’s perspective. The reasonable child standard is required by the Supreme Court in J.D.B., which recognized children’s vulnerability in interrogation settings. We argued that properly applying the reasonable child standard shows Kevin was in custody and that interrogations in schools should be presumptively custodial due to students' restricted movement and heightened susceptibility to pressure.
Youth Tried as Adults

Castaner v. State

Wyoming Supreme Court •
We argue that a lengthy term of years sentence of 42-to-75 years imposed on a 15-year-old violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. We further argued that Mr. Castaner’s 42-year minimum sentence not only exceeds other Wyoming sentences but also exceeds the maximum sentence allowed for second-degree murder in most jurisdictions across the country and exceeds the maximum term of imprisonment permitted before parole eligibility – 25 years – under Wyoming law for a life sentence for first-degree murder, making his 42-year minimum sentence for second-degree murder disproportionate and arbitrary in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Extended Foster Care

Ocean S. v. County of Los Angeles

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit •
This brief was filed in support of Plaintiffs to affirm the district court’s ruling that the Younger abstention should extend no further than the three exceptional circumstances set forth by the Supreme Court. The brief explains that the affirmance of the district court’s order will permit Plaintiffs, youth poised to transition out of the foster care system, to redress serious injuries caused by Defendants’ failure to provide safe and suitable foster care placements for youth.
Youth Interrogations & Access to Counsel

Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto v. United States Department of Health and Human Services

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit •
The brief emphasized that children have the right to meaningfully participate in immigration proceedings and dedicated legal counsel is necessary to facilitate that participation. Moreover, the brief argued that legal counsel is vital to protect children from the well-documented, severe physical and emotional mistreatment children suffer while in custody and to mitigate the detrimental impact of ongoing separation from their families. Finally, the brief highlighted research that shows appointing counsel saves the government money because lawyers expedite case resolution, shorten the time children spend in care, and reduce more costly case outcomes.
Juvenile Life Without Parole (JLWOP)

People v. Hazard

Colorado Supreme Court •
Our brief presented substantial research demonstrating that older adolescents, including 19-year-olds like Mr. Hazard, share the same developmental characteristics the Supreme Court relied on in Miller to hold that mandatory life without parole is unconstitutional for youth under 18 and urged the court to o follow the lead of state supreme courts in Michigan, Massachusetts, and Washington, which have all recently found that mandatory life without parole is unconstitutional for youth under 21.
Juvenile Life Without Parole (JLWOP)

Daniel v. State

Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals •
We argued that Mr. Daniel did not receive an individualized sentencing hearing to assess his youth and its attendant characteristics, as required by Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460 (2012) and State v. Booker, 656 S.W.3d 49 (Tenn. 2022). We further argued that Mr. Daniel’s youth was likely used against him due to the racist “superpredator” myth that led to the disproportionate punishment of Black youth like Mr. Daniel in the 1990s and early 2000s.