On June 25, 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that juveniles who committed murder could not be sentenced to life in prison because it violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the majority, stated that “Mandatory life without parole for a juvenile precludes consideration of his chronological age and its hallmark features – among them, immaturity, impetuosity, and failure to appreciate risks and consequences. It prevents taking into account the family and home environment that surrounds him – and from which he cannot usually extricate himself – no matter how brutal or dysfunctional.”

However, four justices strongly disagreed, arguing that mandatory sentences reflected the will of American society that heinous crimes committed by juveniles should always be punished with a sentence to life in prison. Justice Alito noted that otherwise, “Even a 17 1/2-year-old who sets off a bomb in a crowded mall or guns down a dozen students and teachers is a ‘child’ and must be given a chance to persuade a judge to permit his release into society…”

Write an essay analyzing the issues raised by these arguments. Be sure to indicate which side you most strongly agree with. Support your position, from the texts provided (direct quotations ONLY). Your essay should be as clearly focused, well organized, and carefully written as you can make it.

Use 3 of these texts:
https://d3jc3ahdjad7x7.cloudfront.net/hr0uOfSHlYSIaCKiKdiU5LDnsPwIpySWuqrh1fU2SLtkE73f.pdf