As you’ve no doubt heard, this is shaping up to be a big week at the Supreme Court. The justices are concluding their busy term by announcing final decisions on a variety of cases, many with significant impact on our civil liberties. While an answer on the Affordable Care Act appears destined for Thursday, this morning did yield major decisions on Arizona’s controversial immigration law and on juvenile sentencing.
The Court issued a split decision on Arizona’s bill, striking down parts of the law while upholding the most hotly disputed provision. That piece – known commonly as “Show Me Your Papers” – requires police to determine the immigration status of someone arrested or detained when there is “reasonable suspicion” they are not in the U.S. legally. (Incidentally, if you happen to know of anything other than racial profiling that could give police “reasonable suspicion” that someone is in the country illegally, please contact the ACLU of Maine at 207-774-5444, as we have yet to hear a rational explanation from anyone.) In a small consolation, the Court did leave open the door for future challenges to the law. This does little for the thousands who will be racially profiled as a result of this decision, but it does provide some hope that a future case might reverse this unfortunate ruling.
Luckily, the Court’s decision will have a limited impact here in Maine since our legislature has already rejected Arizona’s controversial approach. We can be thankful that they recognized how harmful such an approach is to our fundamental values of fairness and equality. Other states aren’t as lucky, which is why the ACLU announced today that we have amassed an $8.77 million “war chest” to aggressively battle any state’s attempts to enact copycat legislation while also fighting the “corrosive effects” of existing anti-immigrant laws in Arizona and five other states.
In addition to its ruling on immigration, the Court also handed down an important decision related to juvenile sentencing. At issue was the constitutionality of mandatory life in prison without the possibility of parole for juvenile homicide offenders. In a narrow ruling, the Court said that such a sentencing scheme does in fact violate the Eighth Amendment and qualifies as “cruel and unusual punishment.” This echoes a previous decision that ruled out life sentences for non-homicide offenders, as well as a 2005 ruling that found the death penalty unconstitutional for offenders who were under 18 at the time of their crime.
Lots more coverage is available on these decisions from the ACLU. For more on the Court’s decision on juvenile sentencing, check out this post at ACLU.org. For reaction to the ruling on Arizona’s immigration law, we’ve got in-depth analysis here, a useful infographic on the impact of the decision here, and a brand new “Know Your Rights” video here. There’s much to digest after such important decisions, so keep checking back as we’re sure to have lots more in the days and weeks ahead.
