Poster #83 - Examining How States Are Extending Developmental Arguments that Banned Juvenile LWOP to Emerging Adults

• In Event: ASC Poster Session I

Abstract

In January 2024, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in Commonwealth v. Mattis held that sentencing emerging adults under 21 years old to life without parole (LWOP) was unconstitutional. Because of the neurological similarities—related to impulsivity, risk taking, peer influence, and brain plasticity—between these emerging adults and juveniles, the court determined LWOP constitutes cruel or unusual punishment for this age group. Although more states today are considering the youthful, developmental characteristics of emerging adults in justice responses, state outcomes have varied. This study explores if and how states have applied the arguments previously used to reduce punitive sentencing of juveniles to emerging adults. Using a mixed methods approach with content analytical, iterative, and constant comparative techniques, state cases following the Commonwealth v. Mattis (2024) decision were collected and analyzed. The findings are presented with a discussion of the implications for law and policy. How states have applied advancements in developmental neuroscience and psychology to emerging adult sentencing decisions suggests the juvenile arguments of lessened culpability and greater capacity to change may be extending incrementally to emerging adults.

Authors

• Edie Fogel, Loyola University New Orleans

• Victoria Rivera Laugalis, Loyola University New Orleans

• Jaslin Mestas, Loyola University New Orleans