Aug 6, 2015 2 min read

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2012, in the case of Miller v. Alabama, that it’s unconstitutional to impose mandatory sentences of lifetime imprisonment without parole upon juveniles. This is cruel and unusual punishment.

Should this decision apply retroactively to juveniles who were already suffering this grievous injustice for decades? Absolutely.

However, politicians concocted a inhumane concept called “nonretroactivity” to say, “Absolutely not!” Our Congress and the legislatures of some states, like Pennsylvania, made laws stating U.S. Supreme Court decisions are not retroactive unless the high court says so, which limits and often bans the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances. It’s a wonder this unconstitutional imbalance hasn’t already been checked, since the First Amendment clearly states, “Congress shall make no law respecting … the right of the people … to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

“Redress” inherently implies retroactivity. All U.S. Supreme Court decisions on constitutional rights must apply retroactively to redress the grievances of people who are already unjustly suffering from a grievous violation of their constitutional rights.

Sentencing a child to spend the rest of his or her life in prison shouldn’t even be an option. But many inmates have grown old and died in prison without justice or mercy. It’s sad to realize we are so inhumane here in America. We must change.

Bert Hudson

Waynesburg