July 28, 2009
Some of the amici briefs in support of the defendants in Graham and Sullivan
I am still working through the top-side merits briefs in Graham and Sullivan (discussed here), which are the two SCOTUS juve LWOP cases that present fascinating Eighth Amendment question. I hope to be able to find time in the weeks ahead to blog about what these merits briefs argue (and what they do not argue).
In the meantime, folks ahead of me on their juve LWOP reading can and should start checking out the 14 amicus briefs filed on behalf of the defendants that the SCOTUSwiki folks have posted here and here. Though I hope to eventually blog about what some of these amici argue, I hope readers might get a running start by noting any especially interesting or unexpected argument to be found in these friendly briefs.
It seems as though the Obama Administration's Department of Justice did not file a brief on behalf of the defendants in these cases. I perhaps can understand the political calculus leading to that reality, but it is another disappointing example of the disinclination of Obama's DOJ to spend any political capital in order to advocate on behalf of even juvenile criminal defendants.
Some other posts on the Graham and Sullivan cases:
- Does Roper suggest young juve LWOP is unconstitutional?
- SCOTUS grants cert in Sullivan, juve LWOP case
- The (unpreserved?) procedural issues in Graham juve LWOP case
- What might (and should) DOJ and other potential amici say about Graham and Sullivan?
- Analyzing the cert grants in both Graham and Sullivan
- Gearing up for the SCOTUS juve LWOP cases on the horizon
- Top-side briefs in Graham and Sullivan, the two SCOTUS juve LWOP cases
July 28, 2009 at 07:18 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Some of the amici briefs in support of the defendants in Graham and Sullivan :